Question 1 - What is In the event that Nirvana prosecutors charge Liz Danvers with motor vehicle theft for the theft of the Ennis Lab van, the following excuses, justifications, and defenses can be used against this criminal charge. First, we must look at the facts of the case surrounding this event; after Liz, Eva, Julia, and Hank fled the scene where Kate got trapped in the cave, they found the van. Their concerns grew as the predicted storm approached; Hank demanded they take the van in order to save themselves from the weather conditions. Liz objected to this, stating that the missing scientists would need the van more than they did because the scientists were not wearing winter gear; she suggested that they hike back instead. Upon hearing …show more content…
In this case, one can argue that Liz did in fact commit motor vehicle theft, but it was “not wrong” given the circumstances of the situation (Chutkow Lecture, March 6). Since Nirvana follows the Model Penal Code with respect to any excuse, justification, or insanity defenses, we approach duress with four questions: Does the defendant believe there is a threat to themselves/others? Is this threat imminent? Are there alternatives/no escape? Did the defendant recklessly put themselves in this situation? The first three questions can be answered easily: Liz believed that she was in imminent danger and had no escape because of the gun pointed at her head, she feared that Hank would shoot and kill her if she did not obey him. However, question four can be debated. The prosecution can argue that Liz recklessly put herself in the dangerous situation after she pushed Kate into the cave and trapped her behind an avalanche. Had she not done this, Kate may have been with them while finding the car and Liz may not have been charged. We can infer this because had Kate not been pushed into the cave, she would most likely have been present with the …show more content…
First, we must consider the facts of the case, specifically the ones that surround this event. Julia Navarro has had a history of erratic behavior, she was described to have walked around her previous apartment at night, as if in a trance, and it took several minutes for another person calling her name to get her to respond and come back to consciousness. She has also had a history of claiming to hear voices and see shadowy figures that call her. Julia appears to have schizophrenia but has never formally been diagnosed with any mental illness. It has been said that since moving to Myrontonia, her condition has worsened. The cause seems to be stress, as it is usually in stressful situations where people begin to see spirits and omens. She was brought along to the rescue by Eva, who said that she was hesitant to leave Julia alone because she was having a “bad day,” indicating that there was a possibility that Julia would start hallucinating. Later on in their rescue mission, Julia was put in a very high stress situation when Hank put a gun to Liz ‘s head and forced her to drive the lab van in order to get the group out of the severe snowstorm. The van was full of several cages that contained live chickens right behind where Eva and Julia were sitting. Because
On March 24, 2016, officers were dispatched to a scene where a male subject was trying to gain entry into a vehicle using a hammer. Upon arrival officers made contact with a male subject who was later identified as Keith Hunt, the defendant, and the victim. The victim explained to the officers she was standing near the trunk of her vehicle when Mr. Hunt approached, He attempted to keep into her vehicle without permission; so she confronted the defendant and tried to secure her vehicle. Mr. Hunt demanded she give him the keys and her wallet. The victim stated the defendant had a hammer in his hand and was threatening her with it while he was telling her to hand over the property. They began to struggle over the keys and the victim screamed
Bermudez told me the purse did not belong to her. I asked Bermudez what was the can she dropped and she said, “I was drinking. The can belongs to me.” I asked Bermudez if there is anything illegal inside of the purse that I needed to know about and she said, “No.” I told Bermudez to sit in the backseat of my vehicle and she complied. I approached and grabbed the salmon colored purse I saw Bermudez drop. Laying on the ground next to the salmon colored purse was 1 24oz Black Berry Steel Reserve Alcoholic beverage (half full). I grabbed both of the items and returned to the hood of my vehicle. I searched the purse and found several large blue trash bags inside. I searched the trash bags and found 1 used methamphetamine pipe. I asked Bermudez if the methamphetamine pipe belonged to her and she said, “No.” I asked Bermudez if she uses any drugs and she said, “No. I found that
Application/Analysis: While using a previous case DePasquale v. State 757.1988, that court held in this case that the defendant was not entrapped when he robbed that undercover female decoy. The court held that the officers committed no misconduct, they also put five factors that show that Miller intended to steal from the decoy. The fact that Mill asked Officer Leavitt for money first and after Leavitt told him no; Miller took it upon himself to take the money away. This act was enough to show Miller intentionally committed larceny, the court held that Miller was not
The issue that this case raises, is whether or not the officers had the right to search the car of a person who they just arrested, while the person is handcuffed and placed in the back of a squad car?
When Mathews heard Clinton begin to yell and hurt Donna through the phone, he called the police. When the police arrived, they noted the disheveled state of the house and the accused’s head injury. Note that, according to Dr. Kim Lenore, a BWS expert, the accused was at the fourth stage of BWS, in which the woman has already realized that she is not at fault for the abuse she is receiving and begins to realize that there is a way out and that she can find it. At this point, however, the defendant lied to the patrol officer and claimed that her injuries resulted from a fall. Dr. Lynn Johnson, Yale Law professor and psychology expert, agrees that this “excuse … is characteristic of the guilt stage. The defense can’t have it both ways.” If Donna had really been undergoing BWS in the way that she and the defense’s expert witness, Dr. Lenore, had claimed, she would’ve had no qualms against telling the police the truth and having Clinton arrested for domestic abuse. She didn’t do this because she had already planned her own way
I arrived on scene at 17:10 hours. A juvenile was standing under the carport beside a white Dodge Durango. The reporting party, Kaella D. Barners (F/B, DOB: 05/04/1977), exited the front door when she seen deputies arrive. I approached the juvenile, Katera Edwina Barners (F/B, DOB: 08/29/2000). Katera was calm and cooperative. Katera had been upset at her mother. I observed an end table on the hood of the vehicle. I asked Katera if she put it there. Katera said she threw it there in attempt to damage the vehicle.
been forced to drive to a rural area before the assailant raped her twice ("A.B. Butler").She was
A court will likely find Robert Tracy's confession inadmissible, as the police used trickery tactics to gain admission. Generally, "the possibility of coercion inherent in custodial interrogations unacceptably raises the risk that a suspect's privilege against self-incrimination might be violated. " Com. v. Clark, 461 Mass. 336. The.
The case of Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark case in the United States that asked the question of how much pressure the police can put on a suspect when they are trying to get information or a confession from them. The beginning of this case started in 1963, when Ernesto Miranda was kidnapped at knife-point, raped, and robbed by a woman named Patricia. He was then seen by witnesses committing another robbery. When Miranda's girlfriend was questioned about it, she admitted that it was Miranda committing these crimes, resulting in his arrest. Miranda was placed in a line-up with three other men, while Patricia pointed him out of the line-up.
The death of Julia was an accident where the murderer was Dr. Royllot. He had put the deadly snake in the safe so it can kill Julia. He trained it to go after the milk so he had put milk in the bed of Julia. The death of Julia was also connected directly with Dr. Royllot who wanted to kill Helen because she was the only person that wanted to know how her sister died. Moreover Sherlock and Watson solved th...
It is believed that it is likely that Mary Robbins will prevail in a false imprisonment case if there was no probable
.In general, to prove duress, Kelsey-Hayes must show a combination of a wrongful act by one party and the lack of reasonable alternative sources. For modification, it is important to note that a threat to breach-that is a threat not to perform where one does not believe that one has a legal justification for non-performance an count as a wrongful act. Therefore, modification coerced through threats of non-performance may turn out to be unenforceable, if the other elements of duress are proved and questions of good faith also point to non-enforcement. Under UCC law, modification is policed, not through the consideration doctrine but through the doctrines of duress and good faith. Although both of these doctrines are discussed in greater details,
The defense of duress is available where a defendant commits a crime to prevent the greater of death or serious injury to himself or another threatened by a third party. On the other hand, the defense of necessity refers to circumstances where a person chooses to commit an offence to avoid a greater evil to them or another which would result from objective dangers arising from the circumstances in which they are placed . The difference between these two similar defenses is that duress is regarded as an excuse in English Law, whereas necessity is regarded as a justificatory defense.
In addition, the matter in which the victim was confined comes into play when determining if it is a case of false imprisonment or kidnapping. This also varies by jurisdiction, although most do concur that any force or threat of force used during the incident is enough to obtain a conviction. Certain jurisdictions, however, state that confinement that occurs as a result of deception is adequate for a conviction. A Guilty
Duress: It occurs when one party exercise improper pressure on another party and that party feels like they have to choice apart from entering into the contract where that party enters into a contract as a result of threats, physical violence, force etc. Duress makes the contract voidable...... Duress can take various forms for instance, threats of violence, threats of unlawful restraint, threats to property etc ....Moreover sometimes duress arises when one