Assassination of Federal Judge John Howland Wood, Jr. Deyvahn Schultz North Atlanta High School Literature and Composition The following essay is about the assassination of Federal Judge John Wood. Judge John Howland Wood, Jr. was born on March 31, 1916. In 1970, Judge Wood became a United States Federal District Judge for the Western District of Texas. Judge Wood was tough on crimes including the making, selling, and distribution of illegal drugs, and he had a reputation for giving long prison sentences to drug dealers. This reputation gained him the nickname, “Maximum John.” In 1979, mobster Jamiel (“Jimmy”) Chagra was awaiting his trial for drug trafficking, and it was inevitable that he would be found guilty, and he was prepared to take any measure to prevent this fate. Consequently, Judge Wood was killed in front of his …show more content…
home in San Antonio, Texas, on May 29, 1979, the day of Jimmy Chagra’s hearing. Jimmy Chagra cowardly hired Charles Voyde Harrelson to assassinate Judge Wood on the day of his hearing because he did not want to go to prison; Jimmy suspected that he would receive a long sentence since he was a drug dealer and the judge despised drug use. Jimmy and his attorney were sure that he was going to have to face a tough penalty for his offenses. Despite how hopeless his situation seemed, Jimmy was certain that he did not want to go to prison. Jimmy was a high-ranking mobster and controlled a significant part of the drug industry. Prison life was demeaning and humiliating compared to his lifestyle. Jimmy had authority over so many things and people, and he did not want to be ordered around by prison guards and other prisoners. He would be disgusted. Jimmy Chagra had formerly been convicted of drug trafficking, and he had already been imprisoned on several occasions. Jimmy suspected that he would receive a long sentence since he was a drug dealer to whom Judge Wood gave long prison term. Jimmy could not get away his crime because he already had many chances. The judge already offers long prison sentences to defendants. Jimmy has been arrested many times and has served time in jail and been released under many conditions. He is proving that he disrespects the law and judges. The judge was not going to be happy with him at all, and he may even embarrass him since he has been in court many other times. It is not the judge’s fault that Jimmy is in jail. Jimmy put his self in this situation. One way to view Judge Wood's strictness on drug offenders is because the judge despised drug use.
If Judge Wood did not approve of citizens using drugs, then ever offender whom he had to judge because they were caught using drugs would receive harsh punishments, and he would be unfair and treat them with little respect. Although it may be true that Judge John Wood despised drug use, the main influence on the judge giving drug dealers long prison sentences was because traffickers play an important role in the deterioration of neighborhoods and the crimes that some people have to endure due to drug rivalry. The drug use is only a portion of the problem. If the drugs were not illegally distributed in the first place, then the problem could not originate. Judge John Wood would not have given Jimmy Chagra a prison sentence for drug use; he was on trial for drug trafficking. Jimmy Chagra cowardly hired Charles Voyde Harrelson to assassinate Judge Wood on the day of his hearing because he was afraid of a long prison sentence; Jimmy suspected that he would receive a long sentence since he was a drug dealer and the judge despised drug
use. The assassination of U.S. Federal District Judge John Howland Wood, Jr., was not right because he was only doing his job. Jimmy Chagra was trying to protect himself. It was a selfish act. Charles Harrelson took the life of a man who was working for justice. It was also very horrible knowing that he had a son, Woody Harrelson, who later became famous.
Convicted for the murders of his wife and two kids, thirty-four years ago, Dr. MacDonald still endures the agony of being accused of killing his family. Even after twenty-four years of imprisonment and several unlawful court hearings, additional documentation continues to up hold Dr. MacDonald’s testimony.
On the night of November 28th 1976, 28-year-old Randall Adams was hitchhiking on a Dallas road when 16-year-old David Harris picked him up. Harris, a runaway from Texas had stolen the car along with his father’s shotgun. They spent the day together and that night went to a drive-in movie The Swinging Chandeliers. Later that same evening officer Robert Wood was shot and killed when he pulled a car matching the exact description as Harris’s over. Two witnesses-including Harris, named Adams as the murderer. Adams received a death penalty sentence that in 1979 that later was reduced to life in prison. It was early in the 1980’s when director Errol Morris happened upon Adams’s court transcripts whilst shooting a different documentary about a Dallas psychiatrist who was frequently consulted in death row cases. Convinced of Adams innocence and the false accusations made against him Morris began making a film on the subject.
“Corruption is like a ball of snow, once it’s set a rolling it must increase (Charles Caleb Colton).” Colton describes that once corruption has begun, it is difficult to stop. Corruption has existed in this country, let alone this very planet, since the beginning of time. With corruption involves: money, power, and favoritism. Many people argue today that racism is still a major problem to overcome in today’s legal system. American author (and local Chicago resident) Steve Bogira jumps into the center of the United States justice system and tells the story of what happens in a typical year for the Cook Country Criminal Courthouse, which has been noted as one of the most hectic and busiest felony courthouses in the entire country. After getting permission from one of the courthouse judges’ (Judge Locallo) he was allowed to venture in and get eyewitness accounts of what the American Legal System is and how it operates. Not only did he get access to the courtroom but: Locallo’s chambers, staff, even his own home. In this book we get to read first hand account of how America handles issues like: how money and power play in the court, the favoritism towards certain ethnic groups, and the façade that has to be put on by both the defendants and Cook County Workers,
On September 13, 1986, Jonathan Wayne Nobles broke into a home in Austin, Texas and stabbed to death Mitzi Nalley and Kelly Farquhar, who were both in their early twenties. Ron Ross, while attempting to intervene, was also stabbed by Nobles nineteen times but survived losing only an eye. Nobles was sentenced to death for murder and was executed after twelve years on death row. While in prison Nobles became a pin pal of Steve Earle, a popular country music singer, and author of this essay. Earle struggled with drug addiction in the past and had spent some time in prison himself. Earle is familiar with life behind bars and is well aware of the changes people can go through while locked up. In the essay “A Death in Texas” Steve Earle writes about
The silence has been broken in recent years in federal courts where witnesses detailed the crimes of drug kingpins and many hit men, putting many of Charlestown's d...
Throughout all of American history there have been those who are well known for committing what are classified as deviant or criminal acts. Most of those who are well known by the public for their actions have committed deeds seen as extremely controversial such as being cult leaders, gang or mafia members, terrorists, rapists, or killers. The lists of members for each topic is numerous, however, there are a certain few that are more prominent than others. One criminal that stands out when speaking of killers in particular is Gary Ridgway, or as he is better known, the Green River Killer. Gary Ridgway is the nation’s most abundant serial killer, with the highest murder rate in America’s history (Gibson).
In Douglas N. Husak’s A Moral Right to Use Drugs he attempts to look at drug use from an impartial standpoint in order to determine what is the best legal status for currently illegal drugs. Husak first describes the current legal situation concerning drugs in America, citing figures that show how drug crimes now make up a large percentage of crimes in our country. Husak explains the disruption which this causes within the judicial system and it is made clear that he is not content with the current way drugs are treated. The figures that Husak offers up, such as the fact that up to one third of all felony charges involve drugs, are startling, but more evidence is needed than the fact that a law is frequently broken to justify it’s repeal.
In Oklahoma, a man named Richard Gossip got sentenced to be put to death for a crime he said that he did not commit in 1997. In 1997, Gossip was convicted of demanding and ordering the brutal beating of Barry Van Treese. Barry Van Treese was a man who owned a motel where the inmate, Richard Gossip worked. According to “evidence”, Gossip hired another young coworker of the motel, Justin Steed, to brutally beat and kill Treese.
Chapman’s supports his argument by trying to prove that people will not be tempted to try illicit drugs just because they are legal, but fails to make his argument clear regarding what kind of drugs he is speaking about. Chapman’s passage focuses only on a few drugs like cocaine and marijuana, but his implicit conclusion sounds like he wants all drugs to be legalized. Not only is his argument unclear, Chapman fails to provide unbiased evidence, statistics and information that would convince us that it really would be best for society if drugs were made legal. Overall, the argument presented in this passage fails to illustrate both sides of the argument, and convince readers that drugs should be
If I could spend one afternoon with someone dead or alive, I would choose Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court Justice. Antonin Scalia was considered one of the most influential conservative Supreme Court Justices in history. Recently in February of 2016, Scalia passed away, leaving his legacy forever in the court. Scalia was involved in numerous landmark cases that shaped American history, for example District of Columbia v. Heller and Bush v. Gore. As a young conservative who is anticipating a major in political science and future law school, Antonin Scalia’s career and political views reach to my similar goals.
A week after James Neaville left the Missouri State Hospital’s psychiatric ward in April 1987, he told authorities that he was hired as an assassin by James Beckman to shoot President Reagan with an Uzi submachine gun. Later, he would t...
One of the many problems with the criminal justice system is the issue of mandatory sentencing. A mandatory sentence is when people convicted of certain crimes are punished with at least a minimum number of years in prison. Mandatory sentencing especially applies to crimes related to drugs, thus criminals who have gone to prison for rape and other violent crimes, often serve less time then drug dealers because of these mandatory laws. Many politicians view this as unfair because these harsh laws on drugs are not fixing the problem, rather they are costing tax payers millions of dollars and overpopulating prisons. To fix the problem law enforcers must convict and sentence the drug lords, rather they are harshly punishing addicts and “drug
Echols won a district wide writing contest, he worked in the community with at risk youth. He received a two decade sentence for having drugs, money, and an unloaded rifle. In his case Echols was forced into selling drugs by the poor economy and not being able to find a job. He sold drugs to take care of his family and to put himself through school. He was nonviolent, did not have a record, and was a model in the community but due to his circumstances which left him no other choice but to sell drugs. If there was more money put into communities like Echols community, and not into prisons, Echols would have had a chance to a better life with his family. The judge was forced to by these sentencing laws to sentence Echols to 20 years after finding 44 grams of crack, almost 6,000 dollars to pay for school, and a rifle that had never been loaded. His lawyer argued that his case could have resulted in a probation term, but the Mandatory Minimums sentenced Echols 10 years for the drugs and another 10 years for the rifle. A heartbreaking case where a man who wanted to provide for his family, go to school, fell into tough times, and had no other choice but to sell drugs. His wife also spent all their savings in legal fees and lawyers. Mandatory Minimums not only sentenced him to 20 years, but also his family. His daughter is going to be without a
Jarecki, teases out racism as the center piece of the drug war, new sentencing guidelines and the resulting prison enterprise. He dared to broach the subject of an era when state and local government do not have the cash to provide basic services to their citizens there was the foresight to continue making numerous arrests for nonviolent drug offenses and create prison enterprise to house them. In my opinion, the enterprise at the time was only known to politicians, correctional institutions and private contractors. Then, with almost laser-guided precision a disproportionate burden of the sentences fell on African Americans. Mr. Jarecki is direct his statements that American drug laws are laden in racism. Time and again, politicians have criminalized the habits of certain groups of people to fulfill an agenda unbeknownst to the intended target. With this theory in mind, the latest strategy was seemingly designed for African Americans, but other ethnic groups have been targeted in the past. There was opium as an illicit drug connected Chinese immigrants at the turn of the century. We completely ignored, during the same time Americans used opium in elixirs and tinctures for medicinal purposes (Dial, 2013). Later there was hemp linked to Mexicans immigrants, the marijuana of the day. There was not much to hide about the fact that both Mexicans and Chinese had incredible work ethic, and the willingness to take low wages. This notion ultimately meant
“Getting tough on drugs inevitably translates into getting soft on nondrug crime,” they write. “When a decision is made to wage a ‘war on drugs,’ other things that criminal justice resources might do have to be sacrificed.”