Your honor, my client Johnny Cade, is innocent. On the day of the murder of Robert Sheldon, he and his gang approached Ponyboy Curtis and Johnny Cade, causing trouble. According to my client's accomplice, Ponyboy, “I ducked and tried to run for it, but the Soc caught my arm and twisted it behind my back, and shoved my face into the fountain.” My reasoning for this statement is because my client expressed to Ponyboy, (1) "I had to. They were drowning you, Pony. They might have killed you. And they had a blade... they were gonna beat me up...." "like they did before." My client's accomplice stated that, (2) “I couldn't hold my breath any longer. I fought again desperately, but only sucked in water. The next thing I knew, I was lying on the pavement beside the fountain, coughing water and gasping.” In statement 1, Johnny Cade is expressing that he had no choice, he was not going to let his friend Ponyboy Curtis, die. …show more content…
In statement 2, however, Ponyboy is telling of his experience at the exact time of the murder. Now, I shall present reasons as to why my client is innocent. Johnny told Ponyboy, “They might have killed you.” Ponyboy stated, “His eyes were huger than I'd ever seen them.” This shows that Johnny was scared and did not want Ponyboy to get hurt. Ponyboy describes Johnny as a “puppy that has been kicked too many times”. This describes the innocence of my client from Ponyboy’s point of view. Many of you in the court may think that Johnny Cade had other options. He had no way to contact authorities, and there was no way he could have talked his way out of it. He could not have just stabbed or slashed a leg, which would have put him in greater danger, as there are other members of Robert’s “gang” surrounding
Suzanne Lebsock, the author of “A Murder in Virginia”, has written many historical novels, including “The Free Women of Petersburg: Status and Culture in a Southern Town, 1784-1860”, “Visible Women”, and “A Share of Honour”. Lebsock has been recognized with the MacArthur Fellowship, the Bancroft Prize and Berkshire Conference Prize for “The Free Women of Petersburg”, and the Guggenheim Fellowship. “A Murder in Virginia” captures the essence of the Southern society post-slavery. The strictly fact based novel goes chronologically from soon prior the murder of a white farm wife, Lucy Pollard, to the convicting of suspects, to sentencing those found guilty to be hanged, to the children of Fort Mitchell searching for the lost money. These events span from 1895 to over a century later. The previously
Evidence: "You really killed him, huh, Johnny?" "Yeah." His voice quavered slightly. "I had to. They
Derrick Wallace, an ambitious handsome straight A student at Monroe College, has his entire life set out. He has recently won his basketball championship game and received exciting news from his girlfriend, Julia, about her moving back to the city from upstate university.
When I discovered that my English class had to do a Research Paper, I became horrified. I thought students only did this when they were finishing graduate school not when they were starting their first year in college. All I knew about research papers was that there is an overwhelming amount of research to do. In my efforts to complete this obstacle and not bore myself to sleep with researching, I wanted to do an interesting topic, but I had no idea where to begin. I spent hours going through a great number of subjects and people, but once I found topic remotely interesting, I could not find much information on the Library of Congress website. Therefore, I decided to choose one word that would hopefully lead me to an interesting topic. I set my search limits to manuscripts and searched the word murder. There, the first name at the top of the page was Sirica, John .
Respondent Michael C. was implicated in the murder of Robert Yeager. The murder occurred during a robbery of the victim's home on January 19, 1976. A small truck registered in the name of respondent's mother was identified as having been near the Yeager home at the time of the killing, and a young man answering respondent's description was seen by witnesses near the truck and near the home shortly before Yeager was murdered.
Ernest Hemingway once said, “All things truly wicked start from innocence.” This quote is relevant to the story, The Outsiders, because sixteen year old Johnny Cade is considered innocent. Johnny is still considered innocent because he is not yet an adult. Another reason he might be believed innocent is because he is quiet, small for his age, and the pet of a group called ‘The Greasers’. However, his conceived innocence is soon diluted not by adulthood, but the truly wicked act of murder. He and Ponyboy Curtis were running away when some guys from another group called ‘The Socs’ stopped them and were going to beat them up. Johnny ended the impending fight quickly by stabbing Bob Sheldon, one of the Socs, in the back because he had told David to drown Ponyboy. During this paper our group proves our verdict, innocent.
John smith, the accused, stood up in the courtroom and started yelling at the judge about what he thought of his innocence irrespective of the decision that the judge would make. He also cursed the prosecutor and kept quiet when his lawyer warned him of the negative consequences that would follow if he continued with the same behavior. Smith
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
My next claim is in regards to the “old man” juror. If it were not for him voting not guilty the second time, the boy would have been found guilty. He said the reason he voted that way was because of that one juror standing up to the other 11 jurors. He felt that everyone needed to hear all of the arguments because they were dealing with a man’s life. Thanks to that man, the boy was saved.
There is no hearing for the victim, and even if they are truly innocent, they are only left with two options: They have the choice of denial, which will lead to their execution; or confessing, which gets them thrown into jail. To prove that all these people were actually guilty also played a part in lengthening the tragedy. Herrick, Cheever and Danforth are all full of their own importance and strictness to the court. They ask question after question to each victim until the defendant breaks down and confesses to saving their life. Hale, a person who was brought in from out of town to ward off the evil spirits, began to realize the victims’ innocence towards the end.
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.
Anyone that commits a homicide is dangerous that’s why they need to be put away in prison for the safety of people. For Rodney Alcala he was out multiple times out of prison before he was finally arrested and put behind bars once in for all after committing multiple homicide crimes. When someone commits a serious crime against a child or anyone you expect them to be in prison for a long time.
As described in the novel “The Devil’s Knot,” the side of the prosecution has a lot of evidence which they believed was enough to convict the suspects of the murders of Stevie Branch, Michael Moore, and Christopher Byers. However, the most important piece of evidence to them was Jessie Misskelley Jr.’s confession. Despite several faults in Misskelley’s confession, the prosecuting attorneys believed that the story that Misskelley provided was “so close to perfect” and that he gave “so much information that only someone who was involved would know.” Although the murders, according to evidence that had been found, took place in the afternoon into the evening, Misskelley insisted that the three grade-school children had skipped school that day
As the jury discusses the credibility of the woman’s testimony, they have a revelation about the evidence from the stab wound. If the defendant were truly dedicated to killing his father, he would have planned the murder down to the correct way of handling the knife. The corner examined the stab wound to determine that it was created from a downward stabbing position. The defendant had a criminal background that made him appear to be a well trained knife fighter, so if he were the murderer, why would he make an uneducated error? (Rhetorical Question)
It has been said that it is good to have knowledge. This is seen to be very true in The historical fiction story Bargain by A.B Guthrie, when when in a small town a rivalry between two men leaves one of them dead. We must make the choice, was Slade’s death justice, or revenge. Mr. Baumler is responsible for Slade’s death. Therefore, making this an act of revenge.