Before the trial started I was confused what to think, I didn’t want to make my mind up before the trial even started but I couldn’t help but think he was guilty right off the bat. The reason I thought he was guilty was because on the Case Summary it said, “On July 26, 1533 Atahualpa, the emperor of the Inca Empire was found to be strangled to death at the hands of Spanish conquistadors. The command to end the victim’s life was given by Francisco Pizarro.” That last sentence made me think that he was guilty because it says that the command to end his life was given by Pizarro. Before the trial started I also had to figure out what the difference between murder in the first degree, murder in the second degree,and voluntary manslaughter is. …show more content…
I found out that murder in the first degree is murder where there is unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, which means that it was committed after planning or “lying in wait” for the victim. Murder in the first degree also results from a vicious crime such as arson, rape, or armed robbery. Murder in the second degree is an unlawful killing that is not premeditated nor committed in a reasonable “heat of passion” , it can also be described as a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender’s obvious lack of concern for human life.
Voluntary Manslaughter is defined as an intentional killing in which the offender had no prior intent to kill, such as the killing occurs in the “heat of the passion”. The circumstances in which the killing occurs must be the kind that would cause a reasonable person to become mentally or emotionally …show more content…
disturbed. When the trail started I was still convinced that he was guilty but I was open to the defense changing my mind. The trail started with both sides opening statements, the prosecution's opening statement was to prove Pizarro guilty of first degree murder.The defense’s opening statement was to prove Pizarro’s innocence and to prove his only reason for coming to the Incan Empire was to claim land and to spread Christianity. After the opening statements the prosecution called Tupac to the stand. They asked him to tell them his story of what happened. Tupac responded, “Atahualpa got taken by the Spanish. I tried tried to pay off the Spanish by giving them ransom, but he was put on an unfair trial. In the trail he was found guilty and the Spanish were going to put him to a harsh death but if he converted to Christianity his death would be less harsh.” The defense then questions Tupac, they asked, “Did the Spanish ask for ransom?” Tupac responded, “Yes.” The defense then asked, “Did you communicate with Atahualpa?” Tupac then responded, “No.” Finally the defense asked, “Did you see Pizarro get killed?” “No,” Tupac answered. The prosecution and the defence went back and forth arguing. The prosecution then called Ruḿawi to the stand. He told a similar story to Tupac. The defense then questions Ruḿawi, he basically told them that he didn’t see Pizarro die but found him dead. This was the end of day one at this point I was even more convinced that he was guilty. For one his defense admitted to him kidnapping Atahualpa, and second too much added up against him. The second day began with the defense calling Pizarro to the stand.
They basically asked him, “Why did you kidnap Atahualpa?” To that he responded, “I was saving him from starting a war.” Then it was the prosecution's turn to ask, They then asked him, “Where were you at the time of the killing?” Pizarro responded, “I was planning.” The defense then called Hernando to the stand. All they basically asked was, “Who set Atahualpa free the first time?” Hernando responded, “Pizarro.” The prosecution then asked, “Where were you at the time of the murder?” Hernando answered, “At the ceremony. Next the defense called Val Verde to the stand. “What was your goal?” they asked. “To spread Christianity,” he answered. During the questioning Verde kept repeating that he was not a violent person, but the defense brought up that he had owned slaves and abused them and also said that they had no souls. Why would someone try to spread Christianity to people that had no souls? Verde also said that he was at the ceremony Atahualpa was killed at. The prosecution asked Verde, “Who he would consider violent?” To the question he responded, “Pizarro.” They also asked if he thought that Pizarro would kill Atahualpa, he responded
yes. That was the end of the trial. The final day of the trial made me completely reconsider everything. The things Val Verde said made me think that he kill Atahualpa. Here is my evidence that he did it, he was at the ceremony where Atahualpa was killed, he continuously claimed that he was not violent but he abuses his slaves, which tells me that he is willing to lie even under oath. If he is willing to lie about one thing who knows what else he is willing to lie about. I believe after hearing both sides of the story and hearing all of the evidence I believe that Francisco Pizarro is not guilty of murder. However I believe that he is not completely innocent, his defense admitted to him kidnapping Atahualpa. But I do not think that the prosecution offered enough evidence to prove that he is guilty “without a reasonable doubt” which in our legal system where you are innocent until proven guilty makes him innocent.
Causation is the cause of death, and in criminal law it is the connecting of conduct and physiological behaviour with a resulting effect, typically a serious injury or death. The analysis of the actus rea and mens read of the accused will assist the investigators in pinpointing the causation of the murder. In criminal law it is absolutely necessary to prove causation in order to convict an individual for first degree murder.
All of these dealers claimed they were innocent, but one particular defense attorney, Cynthia Barbare, took her client, Jose Luis Vega, at his word. He claimed to be an honest auto mechanic and the dirt under his fingernails led her to believe him. Plus, she found it odd that a reportedly wealthy drug trafficker lived in such a meager home. Her first line of defense was simply requesting that the drug lab test the veracity of the drugs. None of the prior dealers from Alonso’s cases had done so because the Dallas county court system unofficially penalized anyone who requested verification from the drug lab with a much lengthier sentence. The courts had simply relied upon the officers’ field tests. Ultimately, Barbare’s gutsy choice paid off
...ays of getting out of his punishment including insanity, which was professionally proven not the case, and that someone with black gloves signed for him to do what he did. Which was also proven wrong. Mesa was charged with charged with two counts of felony murder, one while armed, along with some robbery and burglary charges. He went to jail for the rest of his life without parole.
Lawyer: Firstly, Your Honour and members of the Jury, I thank you for your time. My name is Evelynne Lee and I am a lawyer for the Defence.I am here today to prove that the intentions of Hernan Cortez were good and honorable and is innocent of the crime of genocide against indigenous civilisations. It is my belief that the Defendant is not responsible and innocent of the charges on the basis that the intentions of Cortes were good and honourable. To prove my statement about Cortes, I intend to call witnesses and give exhibits to prove that his motives were good and honourable to not destroy indigenous civiisations.-30seconds
Bowden’s idea of why this happened focused mainly on the old misunderstood traditions of the tribes living in Mexico. He shows how the friars, churches and icons took the blunt of the revolts force. Bowden points out the religious differences and similarities be...
Madero’s role in the revolution was that he called for the Mexican Revolution to begin by writing the Plan de San Luis Potosí, and to use his troops, commanded by Villa and Orozco, to defeat Díaz at the Battle of Juárez in 1911. After that, Madero became the president of Mexico. Zapata was displeased by Madero’s inability to make land reforms for the peasant farmers. Zapata rose against Madero, but Huerta already turned against Madero and had Madero assassinated in 1913.
Las Casas emphasizes on three main issues throughout his account. First, in almost each chapter, Las Casas writes about the luscious qualities of the land and the different indigenous peoples that inhabit them. Second, he explains and describes in detail how the natives were rapidly being massacred by the invading Christian Europeans. Finally, Las Casas discusses how God had brought justice to the Europeans for their diabolical acts upon the natives. Las Casas, a former slave owner himself, realized that those whom he previously enslaved were just as much human and capable of learning and practicing the Christian faith as he was. As a bishop, he realized he could do little for the Natives except document his experiences (in as much detail as possible) and hope that the royal administration would have sympathy for the Natives and establish laws to protect them from the Europeans.
Under MPC/State Statutes, Murder must have the element of willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing (Criminal Law Outline – Homicide, 2009). The MPC provides that a person is guilty of criminal homicide if they take the life of another person being purposely, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently. MPC divides criminal homicide into three rather than two offenses: murder, manslaughter, and negligent homicide. Under MPC there must be extreme mental or emotional disturbance.
These forms of murder are some of the worst kinds and will ultimately lead to your death or your life in prison. All litigants will have to appear in front of a court. The final decision could be acquitted, which means the defendant would be considered not guilty. 1st degree murder is murder with malice aforethought. Malice aforethought it was a murder that was planned out.
...began to chase him. While trying to escape, Ramirez attempted to steal a car but was unaware that the owner was under the car trying to fix it. When Ramirez started the car the owner came out from underneath it and began to chase him. The mob was still in pursuit now armed with steal rods. They eventually caught up to him and several people beat him until the police got there. He was arrested and taken into custody. It was because of endless appeals that his trial lasted for 4 years. At the end of everything he was found guilty on 43 counts in the Los Angeles county that included 13 murders, burglary, sodomy, and, rape. He was sentenced to the death penalty in the gas chamber. He is still on death row and will continue to be until he is out of appeals. He is quoted as saying "You maggots make me sick. I will be avenged Lucifer dwells within all of us!".
...all want to believe that the crime was truly “foretold”, and that nothing could have been done to change that, each one of the characters share in a part of Santiago Nasar’s death. Gabriel Garcia Marquez writes about the true selfishness and ignorance that people have today. Everyone waits for someone else to step in and take the lead so something dreadful can be prevented or stopped. What people still do not notice is that if everyone was to stand back and wait for others, who is going to be the one who decides to do something? People don’t care who gets hurt, as long as it’s not themselves, like Angela Vicario, while other try to reassure themselves by thinking that they did all that they could, like Colonel Lazaro Aponte and Clotilde Armenta. And finally, some people try to fight for something necessary, but lose track of what they set out for in the first place.
The first to be convicted were three men guilty of executing three people on March 13, 1982 during the Massacre of Rio Negro (“Guatemala hands down first sentences for civil war crimes”). The trial took place in a court in the central province of Baja Verapaz, which allowed for controversy to arise (“Guatemala hands down”). The people wanted justice and agreed with Aura Elena’s statement "We are not seeking vengeance, but rather that this massacre not go unpunished ... that is why we trust justice will be done," (“Guatemala hands down”). The trial resulted in a sentence to death by lethal injection for all three men (“Guatemala hands down”). Guilty military personnel continued to be convicted over the following
Voluntary manslaughter is defined as an intentional killing, where the defendant had no intent to kill prior to the death or killing of someone. Such as a killing in the heat of passion. The circumstances leading to the killing must be an event that would cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed. If not, then the defendant may be charged with a first-degree or second-degree murder. (Samaha, 2013).
General Motors is one of the world's most dominant automakers from 1931. After 1980s economic recession the main goal for automobile companies was cost reduction. Customers became more price-sensitive. Also Japanese competitors came into market with the new effective system of production. So market was highly competitive and directed toward price reduction. The case states that in 1991 GM suffered $ 4.5 billion losses and most part of the costs of manufacturing was due to purchased components. GM NA hired Lopez in order to find the way from "extraordinary" situation and reduce costs.
It was another tough case for Rafael. One he put his heart and soul into to win but lost because of an old photo that resurfaced of the victim in a similar situation. Defence claimed it was a pattern and that the victim was blackmailing a "hero cop". A ONE time photo clearly indicates a pattern. Right. How could the jury be so gullible? It was these cases that always got to him and now a rapist walks free and that “not guilty” verdict ran through his head. Goddammit. Rafael was fuming as he grabs a cup of coffee.