Your Honor, members of the jury, we gather here today to decide the fate of Mrs. Mary Maloney. I am here to prove that Mrs. Mary Maloney heartlessly killed her husband, Officer Patrick Maloney, by inflicting bodily harm. However, opposing my statement is the Defense attorney who is here to prove that Mrs. Mary Maloney was incapacitated at the time and did not have the necessary intent because she was insane. Murder could mean different things to everybody, but the dictionary definition of murder is the deliberate, unjustified, and illegal killing of a human being. I truly believe that Mrs. Mary Maloney was sane during the psychotic killing of her husband, Officer Patrick Maloney. Officer Patrick Maloney had just gotten home from a long day …show more content…
Mary Maloney, she did not really comprehend what had happened, her face was in disbelief. Mrs. Mary Maloney was in a stage of denial and did not want to believe what had just come out of her husband's mouth. Suddenly Mrs. Mary Maloney started thinking about what to make for dinner, she went into the meat freezer, pulled out a lamb leg, unwrapped it, and then proceeded to walk up behind Officer Patrick Maloney as he was fixing himself a drink and hit him as hard as she could with no pause. Officer Patrick Maloney dropped straight to the floor. Instead of Mrs. Mary Maloney feeling regretful after the malicious murder of her husband, she stated that killing him helped bring the shock out of her and cleared her mind. Is murder the new answer to solving problems? Mrs. Mary Maloney is a murderer. In contrast, the defendants might state that Mrs. Mary Maloney was in a bad state of mind because of the bad news that had been broken to her earlier that day, but she was not in a bad state of mind because after the killing of Officer Patrick Maloney, she fixed herself up and went to the store to make alibis by creating a fake scenario about buying side dishes and dessert for dinner to make Officer Patrick Maloney. Mrs. Mary Maloney is a murderer and there is no doubt about it. Thank you to the Judge and Jury for listening and taking this information into
Annie Turnbo Malone was an entrepreneur and was also a chemist. She became a millionaire by making some hair products for some black women. She gave most of her money away to charity and to promote the African American. She was born on august 9, 1869, and was the tenth child out of eleven children that where born by Robert and Isabella turnbo. Annie’s parents died when she was young so her older sister took care of her until she was old enough to take care of herself.
Monica Malpass Bio, Wiki, Married, Husband, Net worth, Divorce, Dating, Boyfriend, career Short Bio Monica Malpass is a famous American journalist as well as a television anchor. Her date of birth is April 28, 1961(56 years). She was born in high point, North Carolina. Although we can find pictures of Monica’s parents and siblings, the details about the parents of Monica are not made available on any Wikipedia. In 1983 Monica obtained bachelors of Arts degree in journalism from the University of North Carolina.
The jury in trying to let the defendant go considered if there were any circumstances that would provide say as a self-defense claim to justify this horrific crime of murder of two people named Mr. Stephan Swan and Mr. Mathew Butler. Throughout the guilt/innocent phase, the jury believes not to have heard convincing evidence the victims were a threat to the defendant nor a sign the defendant was in fear for his life before he took the victims’ lives.
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.
Code Ann., Crim. sec. 2-201 (a) (1) 2014. Lt. Manion’s actions fall into this description based on the series of events that led up to the murder of Mr. Quill. Lt. Manion willfully admits that he shot Mr. Quill, but defends that he was warranted in doing so because he suffered from an “irresistible impulse.” From Lt. Manion’s testimony, he clearly understands the criminality of his actions, however; he argues that his actions were out of his control because they resulted from him seeing the trauma his wife suffered. In his testimony, he describes to the court how he purposefully went into his trailer to obtain the gun that was used to kill Mr. Quill before traveling to the tavern to confront the victim, which shows premeditation and intent to commit murder. The defense would have a difficult time convincing the jury that Lt. Manion was incapable of controlling his actions since his actions were thought out and deliberate, which was displayed in his testimony when asked by his defense attorney why he brought the gun, he said “I knew I had to go to Quill’s bar and I thought I might need it” (Anatomy of a Murder
Throughout the trial, defense attorneys attempted to argue Salvi was suffering from psychological disorders that would make him incompetent for trial. Ultimately, however Salvi was found competent to stand trial. After reading Salvi’s full psychiatric interview, the official court transcript of the four-day competency hearing, and the day-to-day summary; I have come to agree that the defendant, John Salvi was competent to stand trial.
Mary Wade, born on the 5th of October 1777 was the youngest convict to be sent to Australia. Before her life as a convict, she would sweep and beg on the streets of London to make her living.
An influential American printmaker and painter as she was known for impressionist style in the 1880s, which reflected her ideas of the modern women and created artwork that displayed the maternal embrace between women and children; Mary Cassatt was truly the renowned artist in the 19th century. Cassatt exhibited her work regularly in Pennsylvania where she was born and raised in 1844. However, she spent most of her life in France where she was discovered by her mentor Edgar Degas who was the very person that gave her the opportunity that soon made one of the only American female Impressionist in Paris. An exhibition of Japanese woodblock Cassatt attends in Paris inspired her as she took upon creating a piece called, “Maternal Caress” (1890-91), a print of mother captured in a tender moment where she caress her child in an experimental dry-point etching by the same artist who never bared a child her entire life. Cassatt began to specialize in the portrayal of children with mother and was considered to be one of the greatest interpreters in the late 1800s.
R. v. Lavallee was a case held in 1990 that sent waves through the legal community. The defendant, Lyn Lavallee was in a relationship with her partner, Kevin Rust, in which he would abuse her both mentally and physically. On the night of the incident, Lyn and her husband got into a fight, her husband pulled out a gun and told her if she didn’t kill him now he’d be coming for her later. When leaving the room, Lyn shot Kevin in the back of the head killing him instantly. She was convicted of murder, but when brought before the Manitoba Court, she was acquitted of the charges. An appeal was made to the Manitoba court of Appeal on the grounds that expert testimony should not be admitted as evidence in the courts. They argued that the jury was perfectly
Mary Bryant was in the group of the first convicts (and the only female convict) to ever escape from the Australian shores. Mary escaped from a penal colony which often is a remote place to escape from and is a place for prisoners to be separated. The fact that Bryant escaped from Australia suggests that she was a very courageous person, this was a trait most convicts seemed to loose once they were sentenced to transportation. This made her unique using the convicts.
For a long time, women’s potential in Science was little to none. However, over the years, it has now changed because of the outstanding breakthroughs and encouraging accomplishments women have done through the years. It is because of them, women’s potential in Science and other realms of studies has now evolved with more understandings and discoveries. It is for the reason of Maria Mitchell, one of the first female astronomers to be recognized in Science, that women’s potential were essentially respected. Her discoveries during her time as a student, a teacher, and an astronomer paved the way for many others, not just in Science, but also for woman’s rights and potential to be seen.
To conclude, despite all the possibilities and other theories of Mrs. Maloney committing the crime out of anger or severe frustration towards Mr. Maloney, there is no credible way to prove it. Mrs. Maloney simply killed her husband as a result of mental anguish, self defense and trauma inflicted upon her. Mrs. Maloney did not plan to kill her husband. She was simply a victim of her situation and could not control her actions. Mrs. Maloney should not be spending time in jail, but safe at home grieving the loss of her husband.
The appellant was convicted of the murder of his wife by shooting her with a shotgun. His defence was that the gun had discharged accidentally while he was cleaning it. To rebut that defence, the prosecutor called for the evidence of a telephone operator, who stated that shortly before the time of the shooting, she had received a call from the address where the deceased lived with her husband. The witness said that the call was from a female, who in a sobbing voice and hysterical state said, “Get me the police, please!” and gave the address, but before she could make the connection to the police station, the caller hung up. 8 Res Gestae, Topic 3, law of evidence. Prepare by ikram Abdul
The defendant was a jealous woman who had been romantically involved with a man, Mr Jones, who had then gone on to have a relationship with another woman, Ms Booth, who he later became engaged to in the spring of 1971. The defendant, as a result, went to Ms Booth’s home and poured petrol through her letterbox, she then put newspaper, which she set on fire through also. This quickly ignited and the defendant went straight home without alerting anyone to the blaze, which was spreading. Although Ms Booth and her son were able to escape through a window, her two daughters perished, as they were asphyiciated by the fumes from the flames, which were engulfing their house as they slept. The defendant argued that she was not guilty of murder as she did not intend on causing harm or killing anyone, she had just wanted to frighten Ms Booth and as a result should only be found guilty of manslaughter.
In the case of R v Maloney (1985), the defendant and the Victim (stepfather of the defendant), were drunk when they decided to have a contest of who can load and fire a gun more quickly. The defendant shot the victim without aiming as the victim taunted the defendant to fire the gun. Lord Bridge held ‘Foresight of consequences as an element bearing on the issue of intention in murder... belongs, not to the substantive law but the law of evidence’ (Molan, 2001: 95), oblique intent here is held ...