Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Landmark supreme court cases apush
Landmark supreme court cases apush
Landmark supreme court cases apush
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Annotated Bibliography
Kavinoky, D. (2012, May 4). Defense Closing Argument. Retrieved from https://www.nocuffs.com/california-criminal-defense-attorney-defense-closing-argument/
This source is an online article that provided very useful information on the various elements involved during the process of presenting a closing argument. Although the case Kavinoky uses an example of is in a California DUI/DWI trial it was still quite helpful to me in gaining better understanding and perspective of how a closing argument is demonstrated. A few of the steps listed in this article include how the defense attorney should follow up the prosecutor’s closing argument with an even stronger one, addresses weaknesses in the prosecutor’s case, and gains the
…show more content…
trust of the jury. Each of these steps along with those that I didn’t list taught me vital keys in how a defense attorney mindfully and successfully presents a closing argument. This was one of my most helpful sources while writing my closing argument. Linder, D. O. (2017). Closing Argument of Johnnie Cochran in the O.J. Simpson Case. Retrieved from http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/cochranclose.html The source is an online webpage that provided excerpts from a defense attorney named Johnnie Cochran.
Cochran was the defense attorney for O.J. Simpson during the famous 1995 O.J. Simpson trial. Simpson was on trial for the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. I found this page of excerpts very useful because it gave me a raw narrative of a closing argument in a real murder trial. The closing argument provided is a great example of arguing to prevail. Although this source only presents excerpts of Cochran’s closing argument, it still displays how good of an understanding he had of arguments to prevail. This is one of the many things I found to be the most helpful. I believe this is what significantly assisted him in creating the most effective argument. He wanted to achieve a specific goal of proving to the jury that Simpson was an innocent man on trial for murder. This was my most helpful source while writing my closing …show more content…
argument. Listrom, L. L. (2007). Trial Practice: Crafting a Closing Argument. Retrieved from https://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/publications/gp_solo_magazine_home/gp_solo_magazine_index/trialpractice_craftingclosing.html This source is an online article that provided valuable knowledge on steps in creating a closing argument. In addition to information on understanding the purpose of a closing argument and tips on how to effectively present a closing argument. Although each of the tips were helpful, the one I found to be the most useful was to frame the issues for the jury. This tip means that the defense attorney should present a thorough explanation to the jury regarding what is essential to their resulting decision and what is not. This tip is very detailed in its explanation which is why I found it supportive. This was one of my most helpful sources while writing my closing argument. McSorley, B. (2014, May 25). Closing Statement Example: Presenting a Legal Argument. Retrieved from https://blog.udemy.com/closing-statement-example/ This source is an online article that provided convenient information on what a closing argument is and what it entails. McSorley presents various key characteristics of a closing argument which is what I found to be the most useful. One of the characteristics that I found to be the most significant was that a closing argument must be persuasive. In addition, she also provided information on how to both write and organize a closing argument. This information helped me to improve my understanding of how to organize my closing argument better. Towards the end of the article, McSorley also provided both a fictional closing argument example and a famous closing argument example that displayed how productive closing arguments are written. This was one of my most helpful sources while writing my closing argument. Mince-Didier, A. (2018). Closing Argument in Criminal Trials. Retrieved from https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/closing-argument-criminal-trials.html This source is an online article that provided supportive information on both the purpose and limitations of closing arguments. Mince-Didier presented the primary components of what most closing arguments include. Although all of the factors displayed are significant, the two that I found the most crucial were a summary of evidence and a plea to the jury to take specific action. The summary of evidence component of a closing argument relates heavily to one of the key limits on closing arguments. It states that even though attorneys are given a sense of freedom during presenting their closing argument, he/she must not forget to make certain that it has a connection to the evidence that is presented at the specific trial. This information helped me by teaching me which limits are not to be overstepped by an attorney during closing arguments. This was one of my most helpful sources while writing my closing argument. Reich, A. M., & Ellis, D. S. (2013, September 18). Closing Arguments: 10 Keys to a Powerful Summation. Retrieved from http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/youngadvocate/articles/fall2013-0913-closing-arguments-10-keys-powerful-summation.html This is an online article that provided ten major keys to a closing argument. A few of these major keys include preparing the outline of your closing argument prior to your opening statement, knowing which points to emphasize, and using the evidence. Although each of the keys provided in this article were helpful, these were the ones I found to be the most useful. I think that both not being aware of these keys or implementing them while writing a closing argument can make for an unsuccessful and ineffective one. This information helped me by presenting me with ten of the most crucial components in building an effective closing argument. This was one of my most helpful sources while writing my closing argument. Differences Between Opening Statements & Closing Arguments. (2018). Retrieved from http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/differences This is an online article that provided information on the differences between opening statements and closing arguments.
This article gives a thoroughly detailed explanation of both an opening statement and closing argument. In addition, it also demonstrates what the key difference between the two is. It states that during opening statements, both sides (defending and prosecuting) are prevented from stating the evidence of the case. During closing arguments, both sides are free to use and state the evidence. Although all the given information was helpful, I found this source to be the least helpful while writing my closing
argument.
In the opening statements both side of the case make opening statements to lay the foundation of their cases. Opening statements are not allowed to be argumentative and cannot be considered evidence by the jury; they are the road maps laying out where each side intends to take its case. First the prosecution presented its case. They alleged Peterson killed his wife in their Modesto home because he was having an affair, then drove her body nearly 100 miles to San Francisco Bay and heaved it overboard from his small boat. Prosecution offered a steady drum beat of small bits of circumstantial evidence. From the Russian poetry Peterson read his mistress to the fishing gear in his alibi to the dessert featured on a particular episode of Martha Stewart Living, it added up to Peterson's guilt, they suggested. The defense countered that Modesto authorities unfairly targeted Peterson, ignoring important leads that didn't fit their theory. Defense said that, while prosecutors had only assembled a circumstantial case, they had five witnesses that were direct evidence of Peterson's innocence.
The job of a criminal lawyer is quite difficult. Whether on the defense or the prosecution, you must work diligently and swiftly in order to persuade the jury. Some lawyers play dirty and try to get their client off of the hook even though they are guilty without a doubt. Even though the evidence is all there, the prosecution sometimes just can’t get the one last piece of the puzzle to make the case stick and lock the criminal up. Such is the case Orenthal James Simpson.
The novel Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer has a very in-depth conflict that is showcased all throughout the novel. In Theo's community, there is a high-profile murder trial about to begin. Mr. Pete Duffy, a wealthy business man, is accused of murdering his wife Myra Duffy. The prosecutors have the idea that Mr. Duffy did it for the one million dollar insurance policy he took out on his wife earlier, however they have no proof to support this accusation (Grisham 53). The defendants do however have the proof that no one saw the murder, for all everyone knew, Mr. Duffy was playing his daily round of golf at the golf course right by his house. As the trial moved on, the jury was starting to lean towards letting Mr. Duffy walk a free man. To this point, there has been no proof to support the prosecutors statements that Mr. Duffy killed h...
Simpson had a great defense team, that some called the “Dream Team,” gave Marcia Clark a run for her money. Marcia Clark is the main prosecutor. Primarily, the case was led by Robert Shapiro, one member of the “Dream Team”. Throughout the case, aspiring lawyer Johnnie Cochran, did not make as many irrational decisions as Shapiro did. Prosecutor, Marcia Clark and District Attorney, Chris Darden were trying to prove Simpson guilty. A majority of America hated Marcia Clark because they thought Simpson was
After a lengthy two hundred and fifty-two-day trial “not guilty” were the words that left the world in shock. O.J Simpson was your typical golden boy. He had it all, the nice car, the football career, and his kids. Unfortunately, this all came to an end when two bodies came to be spotted deceased in Nicole Browns front yard and was a gruesome sight. O. J’s ex-wife Nicole Brown and her friend Ronald Goldman both found with brutal stab marks. Unfortunately, all his glory days now brought to an end, he went from playing on the field to begging for his freedom when becoming the main suspect of their murders. Since this trial has not only altered the way Americans viewed celebrities, but it also racially divided society,
An explanation is a set of statements constructed to describe a set of facts which clarifies the causes, contexts, and consequences of those facts. This description may establish rules or laws, and may clarify the existing ones in relation to any objects, or phenomena examined. The first piece Bush Remarks Roil Debate over Teaching of Evolution written by Elizabeth Bumiller, is an explanation. Bumiller addresses her points using facts rather than opinions, she also says, “Recalling his days as Texas governor, Mr. Bush said in the interview, according to a transcript, “I felt like both sides ought to be properly taught.”(2), this signifies that this is an explanation and not an argument since he sees both sides instead of choosing one. For
Jack McCoy has done a fantastic job at convince the jury for a guilty verdict of death penalty in the episode Teenage Wasteland of Law & Order. The closing argument that Jack McCoy presented to the jurors was convincing, logical, and emotional.
On December 2,2015 I went to to the Lynnhaven building to receive some feedback on my agreement paper for English 111. It was a very rainy day after running through the rain when I reached the writing center room. There was a yellow note saying that the writing center was in the student center until December 4,2015. After reading the note I ran back in the rain to my car.It was to cold to walk it was raining. As I approached the student center I was told by a security guard that the tutoring lab was located on the third floor. I had walked up three flights of stairs. When I had finally reached the third floor,I walk into the tutoring lab. There were about eight tables, but only four staff members and one student. Amen had approached me asking what did I need help with today. I replied saying that I would like some feedback on my paper for English. He then pointed to the writing table and said “she can assist you with your paper”.
The defense succeeded at instilling reasonable doubt in the jurors’ minds. A major difference between the defense and prosecution, as stated by Dershowitz, was that the defense relied on factual evidence and scientific experts while the prosecution utilized witnesses that casted a shadow of doubt upon the whole jury (Dershowitz 97). Dershowitz claimed the prosecution knew they had falsities in their case, but kept them in order to win the case (Dershowitz 96). In all, though many people viewed Simpson as a guilty man, the allegations of police perjury and investigative errors allowed the defense to exploit and capitalize on the faults carried out by the prosecution and ultimately implant reasonable doubts in the minds of the jurors.
The question of race was addressed in the high profile court case of O.J. Simpson when Simpson's lawyer, Johnnie Cochran took a Critical Race Theory position in defence of his client (Aylward, 1999:68). Cochran believed that racism was a central issue to the case and it was revealed primarily by detective Mark Fuhrman of the LAPD in a white supremacist form. Fuhrman was the detective who uncovered most of the evidence that connected Simpson to the murders. The defence's argument was that detective Fuhrman, motivated by his hatred of blacks, had planted the blood on O.J.'s bronco and the bloody glove at the Simpson's residence in order to incriminate him for the crime.
The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period.
OJ “The Juice” Simpson is clearly responsible for the tragic deaths of his wife Nicole Brown, and Ron Goldman.There are more than enough proof that suspect that the verdict of this should be reconsidered.The shoes print which were indeed Simpson’s,blood marks that were left on OJ’s car the blood spots left on his gloves,his suicide note.All of these were compelling facts that OJ was the murdered.However due to the miscarriage of justice Simpson was unfortunately found not guilty.Wealth played a major role for the conclusion of the verdict, OJ had a very good legal team that raised questions over much of the evidence and testimony against him. If the average person were charged of crimes that OJ has committed, he/she couldn't afford the lawyers and staff to mount the defense OJ could.
“Witness for the Prosecution” superbly demonstrated a realist view of the operating procedures in a courtroom. The actors within the courtroom were easy to identify, and the steps transitioned smoothly from the arrest to the reading of the verdict. The murder trial of Leonard Vole provided realistic insight into how laws on the books are used in courtroom proceedings. With the inferior elements noted, the superior element of the court system in “Witness for the Prosecution” was the use of the adversary system. Both sides of the adversary system were flawlessly protrayed when the prosecution and defense squared off in the courtroom.
It was the night of June 12, 1994, a woman and her long time male friend are murdered in cold blood. The victims, Nicole Brown Simpson, her neck cut so savagely it was almost severed from her body and Ronald Goldman, stabbed repeatedly, nearly 30 times. The accused, her ex-husband and football star, Orenthan James Simpson, better known as O.J. Simpson. During the trial, a trial that consisted of 150 witnesses, lasted 133 days and cost in the ball park of 15 million dollars, there were many questions asked and even more questions left unanswered (Douglas).
Presenting the Case Orally in Court: The Lawyer has to argue about his client’s case in front of the Judge in court.