More handpicked essays just for you.
Debate on racial imbalance within the justice system
Racial Discrimination in the Criminal Justice System
Justice system race discrimination
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Debate on racial imbalance within the justice system
According to, “Murder on a Sunday Morning”, Brenton Butler was accused of a murder of Mary Ann Stephens. During the trial, there has been some moral and corrupt evidence to prove whether this “suspect” was guilty or not. Many logical pieces of evidence were provided during the trial such as, photographs of the clothing that was worn by Mr. Butler to observe whether Mr. Stephens could identify it – and proving that Mr. Butler was accused because of his race. There has been biased argumentation during this trial such as identifying racial profiling (African-American), another eye-witness name Mr. Stevens discovered a bag of Mary Ann Stephens near the garbage, been accused by the police for “taking the gun” out of bag – but failed to fingerprint
In 2000, Delwin Foxworth was beaten and set on fire outside of his North Chicago home. Foxworth survived the attack but died two years later in a nursing home. Marvin Williford was arrested and convicted for the murder in 2004 and was given an 80 year life sentence in prison. Williford’s defense attorney David Owens is requesting a retrial for the case because of the absence of Williford’s DNA profile in the DNA samples that were taken from the crime scene. Additionally Owens makes the argument that the eye witness testimony of a woman who was present during the attack was unreliable. The woman states that she clearly saw Williford and two other assailants commit the crime, but Owens and Geoffrey Loftus, a professor of psychology at the University
Summary of the Case On August 1987, Donald Butler opened a store in Winnipeg, Manitoba, called the “Avenue Boutique”. In this store, Butler sold and rented pornographic publications that were considered “hard core” and sexual paraphernalia. A couple weeks later, the City of Winnipeg Police searched and seized Butler’s sexually explicit materials lawfully. From this, Butler was charged with 173 counts under s. 163 of the Criminal Code. These charges included s. 163(1)(a) which criminalizes the distribution and the possession for distribution of obscene materials, as wells s. 163(2)(a) for selling and exposing obscene material to the public.
I recently read a book called Monster by Walter Dean Myers, in which a sixteen year-old boy named Steve Harmon was arrested for being accused of shooting a drugstore owner, and watched a documentary titled Murder on a Sunday Morning about a fifteen year-old Brenton Butler being charged with murdering a woman at a motel. I found that the book and the documentary had many similarities and differences. I thought this because both cases are about a young African-American boy who is in custody for something that they did not do. Both police investigations didn't go thoroughly and just rushed through to arrest the boys immediately and are centered around a white defense attorney who tries to convince the jury that the male teen did not committed the crime by giving out evidence.
On May 7th 2000, fifteen year old Brenton Butler was accused of the murder of Mary Ann Stephens, who had been fatally shot in the head while walking down a breezeway of a hotel with her husband. Two and a half hours later, Butler is seen walking a mile away from where the incident occurred, and is picked up by the police because he fit the description of the individual who shot Mary Ann Stephens. However, the only characteristic of the description that Butler featured was the color of his skin. Police then brought Butler to the scene of the crime in order for Mary Ann Stephens’s husband, James Stephens, to confirm whether or not Butler was the individual who had shot his wife. Almost immediately, Stephens identifies Butler as his wife’s killer.
On Bloodsworth’s appeal he argued several points. First he argued that there was not sufficient evidence to tie Bloodsworth to the crime. The courts ruled that the ruling stand on the grounds that the witness evidence was enough for reasonable doubt that the c...
This scandalous case centers on a woman named Katherine Watkins. On Friday, August 18, 1681, Katherine accused a slave by the name of John Long, also known as Jack, of rape. There was some evidence of violence, but there were also outstanding questions about her character and conduct. Those who testified, however, painted a different picture about certain events preceding the crime. They were John Aust, William Harding, Mary Winter, Lambert Tye, Humphrey Smith, Jack White (Negro), Dirk (Negro), and Mingo (Negro). Whether these individuals were so inclined because Katherine Watkins was a Quaker, rather than an Anglican, we can never really know. That certainly fueled the fire, though. The day in question involved an afternoon of cider drinking. Several of the witnesses in the testimonies recounted Mrs. Watkins sexual advances to multiple of Thomas Cocke 's slaves, particularly, a mulatto named Jack. John Aust pleaded that Katherine, at one point, had lifted the shirt of one slave and announced “Dirke thou wilt have a good long thing” (Sex and Relations, 53). She allegedly had thrown another on the bed, kissed him, and, “put her hand into his codpiece” (Sex and Relations, 53). The most interesting piece of evidence that Aust brings forward is that Jack was actually avoiding Watkins at the party, an apparent attempt at avoiding any intimate entanglement with her (Sex and Relations, 52). Finally, he reported that Watkins and Jack had gone into a side room (Sex and Relations, 53). Later in the trial, Humphrey Smith seemingly referred to Aust 's testimony. His deposition suggested that he and Aust had some reservations about Jack 's guilt (Sex and Relations 54). Clearly, the character of the plaintiff was considered important evidence in the trial of a slave for rape. The reasonable extenuating circumstances of the case might have granted the magistrates leave way
Throughout the trial, there were multiple points in which Bibbins had false accusations thrown against him from the victim and the law enforcement of Baton Rouge. The victim clearly misidentifies her rapist and clearly is distraught while identifying, "The victim's initial description of the attacker was a man with long and curly hair, wearing jeans. Bibbins was wearing grey shorts and had short, cropped hair at the time" (Innocent Project). As with false accusations there were multiple occasions in which evidence proving Bibbins innocence were not present during the trial. Baton Rouge police had discarded evidence from the crime, "The allegations of evidence tampering gained credibility in 2003 when DNA testing unavailable at the time of Bibbins' trial excluded him as the girl's rapist" (Sherrer). Eventually Bibbins is able to use this information of evidence tampering to help strengthen his case against the city of Baton
It was a mistaken identity case where the distressed raped women picked out the wrong black man. Even though the conviction was overturned due to DNA evidence, a mistaken eyewitness testimony led to a wrongful conviction that the Burlington Police upheld without question due to prejudice feelings toward determine Ronald Cotton (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo 283). Ronald had his whole family testify that he had been home the night Jennifer was raped however because he had mixed up his dates when he originally confessed that police assumed he was lying despite what he and his family said. The other indication of racism on the police force was when the second rape victim did not pick Ronald Cotton out of the physical lineup; she claimed she was terrified of the black men standing in front of her and just needed to leave, even though she knew it saw Ronald that had raped her (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo 129). Ronald was believed to be guilty and was trying to prove his innocence from the beginning. This simply cannot occur in a justice system where one is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty; racism played a part in convicting this innocent man. Even during the second court case when he was trying to prove his innocence he remembered feeling the jury turn and look at him, "every single one of their white faces" believed how terrible of a man he was (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo
In 1976 Randall Dale Adam’s car breaks down and he is offered a ride by another teenager, David Harris, who, unbeknownst to Adams, was driving a stolen vehicle. When they are stopped by a police officer, multiple shots are fired, killing the officer. When this case was sent to court the jury strongly believes Adam is guilty of the murder. However, Errol Morris exposes misleading witnesses’ testimonies and police misbehavior that led to the jury conviction of the wrong man.
Several groups of white and black men rode the trains in the thirties for transportation. One night a group of white men started a fight with the black men in the train, which led to them getting kicked off. Later on in the case it is proved that the white men start the fight because both of the men have different stories and one of them admits to starting it all. After the white men were kicked off of the train it was ridden to the next stop somewhere in Alabama. Upon arriving at the station the black men and the white women were arrested for vagrancy. While talking to the police the women accused all of the black men of raping them. These women were known prostitutes of the area but their word was still taken over the black men who were accused. Twelve days later the trial took place. There were many witnesses that held bias towards the black men. One acquaintance of the women was a white lady who refused to support the lies that were coming out of the white women's mouths. One physician stated that two of the men were so badly crippled that they were incapable of committing such a crime. This wa...
Butler was one of many to be accused of a crime he didn’t commit. In 1993, a woman got
The evidence discovered during the investigation suggested to the police that OJ Simpson may have had something to do with this murder and they obtained an arrest warrant. The investigators believed that they “knew” OJ Simpson committed the murders. His lawyers and him were informed of the arrest warrant and agreed to a specified time when OJ would turn himself into authorities. Investigators are later admonished, by the defense, on how they handled the crime scene.
The majority of published literature in the US derived from the Vietnam War primarily has a base focus on effects the war experience had on Americans, and on the American culture and psyche. However, Robert Olen Butler, author of the Pulitzer Prize winning, "A Good Scent From a Strange Mountain," as well as many other critically acclaimed publications has been recognized for "breaking the mold" of traditional war writers by constructing his narratives in the first person voices of the Vietnamese. In order for an American write to compose stories through the perspective of individuals from a culture considered so foreign from our own he would have to have accumulated a significant amount of experience and knowledge for his works to be considered legitimate. Butler himself is well versed in the Vietnamese language, has voluntarily participated in the Vietnam War as a translator, and has taught in a predominately Vietnamese American area. The question at hand is; do these facts alone allow his stories to be admissible as authentic works?
The crowded courtroom was absolutely silent as the 12 all white and all men took their seats at the jury box. Chief Justice Albert Mason, one of the presiding judges in the murder case, asked Charles I. Richards, the foreman, to rise. Mr. Richards was asked to read the verdict. “Not guilty”, replied the foreman. Even though the circumstantial and physical evidence pointed to Lizzie Borden guilty of killing her step-mother and father, the all-male jury, men of some financial means, could not fathom that a woman who is well bred and a Sunday school teacher could possibly commit such a heinous crime (Linder 7).
Crimes in America can be vicious and brutal, often leading to long, draw out trials, but it is only fair if you charge the right man. The only way that it can be fair is if you go by the facts and not the appearance of the accused. Many trials in America have men of color pointed out to be criminals. Many crimes are committed for a reason but many people label it as unknown. People are racist especially against colored people, they believe that white men are innocent but that is not always true. They always turn against the colored people for many crimes that could have been committed by a white man. The novel,Monster and the documentary “Murder On A Sunday Morning” are the same because,both cases have similar charges,both crimes were taken in a public place,and the both consist of racism either by the jury or police.