Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Elements of a crime
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Elements of a crime
Imagine an elderly man inviting someone into his home to take care of him, but then his caretaker surprisingly creates a scheme that will get rid of him because of his eye. The old man trusted him with his life, and suddenly he takes it from him. The man I am describing is Mr. Heart, who is guilty of committing first degree murder. He was the victim’s caretaker for a long enough duration of time for them to develop a father-son relationship with one another, yet he killed him in the end. Members of the jury, after going over the evidence against Mr. Heart in the State of New Jersey vs. Mr. Heart case, it is as clear as day that he should be convicted of first degree murder, because the facts show proof of premeditation, deliberation, and malice. …show more content…
To begin the prosecution, the crime that Mr. Heart committed was undeniably premeditated. He took time to plan out the entire murder in his head before his scheme commenced. He knew exactly what he was going to do to kill the victim successfully and as stealthily as possible. First of all, premeditation is the act of planning ahead of the actual murder. The time taken for premeditation does not need to be a long time, but just enough for the average sane person to realize that what they are doing is wrong (“First Degree Murder Overview”). One of the things he did that was premeditated was how he would hide the body after killing the victim. Mr. Heart went through many ideas of how he could hide the body without a trace. He also took precautions on concealing it so that he would not be a suspect in the murder. His testimony states, “If you still think me mad, you will think so no longer when I describe the wise precautions I took for the concealment of the body” (Poe 3). Mr. Heart was very meticulous about the way he would accomplish his goal without ever being caught in the act. He clearly states that he was very careful in coming up with a plan that will surely work. In addition to that, Mr. Heart also premeditated the way he would furtively get into the victim’s chamber unnoticed. Premeditation is “When an individual contemplates, for any length of time, undertaking an activity and then subsequently takes the action” (“Premeditation”). The suspect is guilty of this because he purposely oiled the hinges of the victim’s room, and he did not oil any of the other door hinges in the house. This shows that he thought of ways to quietly get into the old man’s room, and he executed his plan as well. Furthermore, Mr. Heart was well aware of how he would kill the victim as quietly and as cleanly as possible so that it would be very hard to detect the murder. His testimony states, “In an instant I dragged him to the floor, and pulled the heavy bed over him. I then smiled gaily, to find the deed so far done” (Poe 3). The suspect used the victim’s own mattress to suffocate him. He did this so that there would be no clean up and so that he wouldn’t have to worry about a loud noise coming from a certain weapon. Mr. Heart planned out the murder of the victim to the very last detail. He thought about everything and he did not miss a single step. Since Mr. Heart planned out the entire crime before actually doing it, he should be convicted for his actions. In addition to Mr.
Heart premeditating the murder, he also deliberately committed the crime. Everything he did was for a purpose, and he did everything he could to get him to his goal. His testimony states, “Upon the eighth night I was more cautious in opening the door” (Poe 2). Mr. Heart stalked the victim for eight days straight until he murdered him on the eighth night. He tells us specifically in his testimony that he watched the old man as he slept so that he would know the right time to take action. He did all of this purposely so that his plan would work without any flaws. This also shows us that he has plenty of time to consider his actions after deciding to kill the man (“First Degree Murder Law and Legal Definition”). Furthermore, “A defendant deliberates by considering the act and its consequences (but not necessarily the punishment), and deciding to follow through with it” (Segars). Mr. Heart made sure he was extra nice to the old man a week before the act, so that he would not suspect that anything wrong was going to happen. He knew that tricking the victim was wrong, but he did it anyway because it benefitted him and got him one step closer to fully carrying out his nefarious plan. Equally important, he took an excessive amount of time to fit his head into the door when he was stalking the victim during the night. “And every night, about midnight, I turned the latch of his door and opened it- oh so gently” (Poe 1). Mr. Heart not only stalked the old man every night for eight days, but he took an hour just to open the door. He did this solely because he did not want to startle the old man and ruin his plan that he’s worked so hard to carry out. Mr. Heart has done so much so that he could get away with murdering the victim. He cannot get away with all of the damage he has done by stalking the elderly man, being extra kind to him just so that he could take his life later, and taking his time to put his head in the doorway of the victim’s chamber as if it
was no big deal. Another thought is Mr. Heart maliciously killed the victim. He wanted to kill the man and he did without a lawful reason to do so such as self defence. Instead he murdered the old man in cold blood without a second thought, or a good reason to do so. His testimony states, “I think it was his eye! yes, it was this! He had the eye of vulture- a pale blue eye, with a film over it. Whenever it fell upon me, my blood ran cold” (Poe 1). He believed that the victim’s eye was evil and because of this, he could not stand it. Since the eye irked him so much, it compelled him to kill the victim. Even though he knew that it was not a valid reason, that did not stop him from doing so. Considering, “When applied to the crime of murder, malice is the mental condition that motivates one individual to take the life of another individual without just cause or provocation” (“Malice”). We can easily see that Mr. Heart is guilty of malice, because what motivates him to kill the victim is his eye. His testimony states, “but I found that the eye was always closed; and so it was impossible to do the work; for it was not the old man who vexed me, but his Evil Eye” (Poe 1). As you can tell, Mr. Heart did not mind the old man, in fact, he loved him as if he were his own father yet he took his life anyway. Because the eye annoyed him so much, he saw that killing the old man was the only way to get rid of the eye. During the time of the crime, he no longer cared for the man because he was only worried about his eye. All Mr. Heart cared about was getting the eye out of his life once and for all. His testimony states, “He was stone dead. His eye would trouble me no more” (Poe 3). Mr. Heart did not feel sad or guilty about what he had just done to the innocent old man that he used to care for. All he could think about was how he had just killed the victim and he would no longer have to worry about his eye, because he was now dead. He was proud that he had achieved his goal of never having to see the eye ever again. Mr. Heart should be arrested for for not having a real reason to kill the victim, and for being happy about killing the the elderly man. In summation, Mr. Heart was the caretaker of an old man that he learned to love. This was until he decided to take the old man’s life because of his eye. He should be apprehended for committing First Degree Murder because he is guilty of planning the murder of the victim before he took action, committing the crime on purpose, and not caring about anything other than killing the victim for his eye. Mr. Heart premeditated the crime, he deliberately murdered the old man, and he did this maliciously. Take a good look at all of the evidence that’s been presented, and know that this man should go to jail for the terrible things he has done. He cannot be let go because then he will just continue to kill over and over again only because he doesn’t like someone’s characteristics. Vote that Mr. Heart should be convicted for committing the murder of the poor, vulnerable, and innocent old man. Works Cited “First Degree Murder Law and Legal Definition.” US Legal, 2016, definitions.uslegal.com/f/first-degree-murder. Web. Accessed 15 Apr. 2018. “First Degree Murder Overview.” FindLaw. Thomson Reuters, 2018, criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/first-degree-murder-overview.html. Web. Accessed 22 Apr. 2018. “Malice.” West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2, The Gale Group, 2008, legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/malice. Web. Accessed 15 Apr. 2018. Poe, Edgar Allan. “The Tell-Tale Heart.” The Works of Edgar Allan Poe, The Raven Edition, vol. 2. New York: P. F. Collier and Son. 1903. Print. “Premeditation.” Legal Information Institute. Cornell Law School, www.law.cornell.edu/wex/premeditation. Web. Accessed 15 Apr. 2018. Segars, Leigh. “What is Premeditated and Deliberate Conduct?” Nolo. 2018, www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-premeditated-deliberate-conduct.html. Web. Accessed 13 Apr. 2018. “The Tell-Tale Heart (BEST VERSION).” YouTube, uploaded by SalvadorUploader, 22 Oct. 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe0WyjiW5Ps. Web. Accessed 19 Apr. 2018.
In the case of People v. Vasquez, a horrible crime was committed by the defendant, Jesus Vasquez, because he was upset with his girlfriend, Abigail Ramirez, for leaving him and allegedly seeing her ex-boyfriend. Instead of choosing to talk to his ex-girlfriend, Abigail Ramirez, he decided to forcefully break into her home, push her mother down on to the ground, then chase Abigail to the restroom where he violently and horrendously murdered her. There were many primary and secondary victims in this case and left people in pain from his terrible criminal act. Although the defense tries to prove that it was Heat of Passion and that the defendant did not know what he was doing, the evidence proves otherwise. The video shows evidence of shared
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
Billy Joel once sang, “Only the good die young”. In life, it is true, the young and innocent seem to touch more lives around us than anyone else. In the Casey Anthony trial, Anthony was a suspect in the murder of her daughter Caylee. Caylee’s life shouldn’t be counted in years, it should be counted by how many lives she affected, the love she has gained, and the support the country has given her to find out what really happened. In the play, Twelve Angry Men, a boy killed his father; however, both cases were challenged by the obvious and the abstruse evidence. Large cities towards the east coast, in 1982, Twelve Angry Men, and 2008, Casey Anthony Trial, affiliated with two major trials able to modify the lives of the living and the dead. For that reason, during the Casey Anthony case, jurors were conflicted throughout the trial.
After the old man is dead and under the floorboards the police arrive, and the narrator remains calm and his "manor had convinced them.?Villains!" "Dissemble no more! I admit the deed! -- tear up the planks! -- Here, here! -- it is the beating of his hideous heart!" The narrator of "The Tell Tale Heart" shows that he is unreliable. Concluding the questioning by the police, the narrator had a sudden fear and assumed that the policemen have heard the old man?s heart beat. Not only the narrator could hear the old man?s heart beating, but it is assumed (from the audience perspective) that the police could hear the narrator?s heart beating. The narrator listening to the old man?s heart beat is a replacement of his own consciousness that brought out the guiltiness for murdering the old man.
The actions that a parent takes in order to protect or support their child cannot be judged in a courtroom, because parents cannot describe the way that they feel knowing that their offspring is gone forever. In a court of law, Matthew Fowler should be tried for justifiable homicide, and he should possibly plead temporary insanity. A parent cannot control their violent actions, because the feelings that one feels towards a child is much stronger than any other emotion could ever be. Frank Fowler's life was taken in a horrific and traumatic matter, and for this, a parent cannot undergo the normal mourning process. A parent like Matthew Fowler could not go through each day knowing that their child's murderer is walking the streets freely. A mother, like Ruth Strout, would go crazy seeing that heartless person do everyday things that her son/daughter can no longer do. This would drive a person to temporary insanity, causing them to lash out and kill the murderer. Matthew Fowler had reason to kill Richard Strout, even if it would result in hurting Matthew in the end.
On February 2nd, 2016, in trial of the Odysseus, the jury found the defendant guilty of both counts of unjustifiable first degree murder. While both sides of the trial had differing points, the defense had an overall weak and unconvincing case while the prosecution provided strong evidence of these unjustifiable murders using a variety of persuasive techniques.
Every once in awhile, a case comes about in which the defendant confesses to a crime, but the defense tries to argue that at the time the defendant was not sane. This case is no different; the court knows the defendant is guilty the only aspect they are unsure about is the punishment this murderer should receive. The State is pushing for a jail sentence and strongly believes that the defendant was sane at the time of the murder. It is nearly impossible for the defense to prove their evidence burden of 51%. The State claims that the defendant was criminally responsible at the time of the murder. By using excessive exaggeration, premeditation and motive, the Prosecution will prove that the defendant knew exactly what he was doing and how wrong it was.
First of all, I’d like to greatly thank the jury for coming and serving on this trial. Today, Mr. James King is being tried of the felony murder of Mr. Nesbitt. Mr. Nesbitt’s death is a sad truth to his family and his community. However, to place Mr. King as the murderer without solid evidence is preposterous. Remember, I’d like to remind the jury that if there is any reasonable doubt in the claim of Mr. King, you must vote not-guilty. I urge you to realise that by placing Mr. King in jail for 25 years to life, you will be compromising this young man’s entire future. I hope you make an informed decision to keep Mr. King out of jail.
E. Arthur Robinson feels that by using this irony the narrator creates a feeling of hysteria, and the turmoil resulting from this hysteria is what places "The Tell-Tale Heart" in the list of the greatest horror stories of all time (94). Julian Symons suggests that the murder of the old man is motiveless, and unconnected with passion or profit (212). But in a deeper sense, the murder does have a purpose: to ensure that the narrator does not have to endure the haunting of the Evil Eye any longer. To a madman, this is as good of a reason as any; in the mind of a madman, reason does not always win out over emotion. Edward H. Davidson insists that emotion had a large part to play in the crime, suggesting that the narrator suffers and commits a crime because of an excess of emotion over intelligence (203).
We are family members and loved ones of murder victims. We desperately miss the parents, children, siblings, and spouses we have lost. We live with the pain and heartbreak of their absence every day and would do anything to have them back. We have been touched by the criminal justice system in ways we never imagined and would never wish on anyone. Our experience compels us to speak out for the change. Though we share different perspectives on the death penalty, every one of us agrees that New Jersey’s capital punishment system does not work, and that our state is better off without it (Cromie and Zott
One in twenty-five or 4.1% of people sentenced to death are innocent(One in 25). A man named Cameron Todd Willingham was wrongfully sentenced to death. In Texas, during the year 2004 Cameron was accused of killing his three daughters in a fire. Cameron claimed that he was innocent from the very beginning, yet no one believed him. He was found guilty for the act of killing his three daughters in the fire. Later on after his execution, they found more information that helped them come to the conclusion that Cameron was indeed not guilty. As he said from the very beginning(Cameron Todd). This case is particularly weird because the court does not usually look back into a case after one is executed. Cameron is not the only one who was ever wrongfully executed. Cameron is one of many. “I’m actually really opposed to the death penalty”(Bill Paxton). Bill Paxton is one of many who agree that the death penalty is wrong. There are many reasons why one can oppose the death penalty, but the major reason one opposes the death penalty is because it puts the lives of innocent people at risk.
The 12 men in the movie 12 Angry Men, a jury, are deciding upon a case of murder in the first degree. The suspect in custody is an 18-year-old accused of stabbing his father. In this court system, premeditated murder is the most serious crime charged. If the jurors decide that the 18-year-old is guilty of murder than he will be sent to the electric chair and there is no other form of punishment. The men are very reluctant to hear this case because they feel it is very dull and that they can predict the outcome of the case. Alongside that, this trial is on the hottest day of the year with no A/C and no fan, which can account for some of the men’s guilty vote for they want to get out of the room.
In both stories, the chief characters plan in great detail the actions they will take to rid themselves of that which haunts them. The narrator of "The Telltale Heart" is the killer, and he explains in the telling of his story how he felt no ill will toward the old man, but how it was the old man's pale eye that caused his "blood (to) run cold; and so by degrees - very gradually - (he) made up (his) mind to take the life of the old man, and thus rid (himself) of the eye forever."[382] Later, he reflects on how meticulously he goes about entering the old man's room, planning the murder. "For seven nights - every night at midnight" he enters the sleeping chamber.[383] Prince Prospero, in Poe's "The Masque of the Red Death," decides to take with him many friendly "knights and dames"[386] from his court and hide away in secl...
It was midnight when it all happened. Tom Peterson was sleeping in bed next to his wife after a tiring day at work, while his two little daughters slept in the next room. Suddenly he was violently awakened by the terrified screams of his wife only to get a glance of a huge man standing over him with a butcher's knife. Tom was stabbed thirteen times, one of his daughters was killed and his wife was severely injured. Now, the Peterson family has just exited the supreme court of justice in which the judge has condemned the murderer of their little girl to the death penalty, for as it turns out the Peterson family had not been the first victim of this murderer.
The death penalty is unjust and risks outweigh any of the benefits. Many people believe the death penalty is an effective system and the punishment fits the crime yet so many innocent people have been put to death for crimes they did not commit. Reports show Gary Graham was executed in 2000 solely off the testimony of a witness who claimed to get a quick view of the defendant from 40 feet away through a windshield. The evidence is circumstantial but was enough not only to get a conviction but capital punishment. Troy Davis was executed in 2011 even though witnesses recanted their testimonies. The witnesses that were used in his case to further prove his guilt recanted their testimonies, therefore doing the exact opposite, mores proving him not guilty, but a death penalty sentence was still imposed. Cameron Willington was executed in 2004 for killing his ch...