For our trial project, we had to research a murder case and either prosecute or defend the accused. Our group did the murder of Teresa Halbach and defended Steven Avery. We had to go to the court room and defend him just like a real life courtroom would do. My role in this project was being a witness to Steven Avery. I played Jerome Buting, Avery's previous lawyer. I probably wouldn't choose the same role again, I think being a lawyer would be fun and interesting. The groups were formed by our teacher. She asked us to give her an idea of who we would work best with, then she formed our groups based on our answers. I think our group worked well together. We got along nicely and did the work we were supposed to do. During collaboration, what worked was going downstairs or into the collaboration room. It really helped us focus on what we needed to get done. Sometimes, however, we wouldn't do our work and just goof off, but we ended up getting all of our work done on time. Some strategies that helped our …show more content…
team work together was having a leader who made sure everyone was on task and doing what they were supposed to be doing. Some important concepts that I learned were how to present better.
At my old school, we didn't present much so I never properly learned how to do it. I also learned how a courtroom works. It's different than what you see in movies and TV shows. It was really cool to pretend to be in a real courtroom and practice courtroom etiquette. When I didn't understand something, my strategy was to ask my teammates and if they didn't know, I would ask my teacher. I feel like I had enough information but I could of had more information. I also know that all of the information I had was correct and accurate. This project related to real life because I could end up being a lawyer. During arguments, I know to back up my facts and accusations with evidence to prove I'm right. It doesn't relate to real life however, because in real life courtrooms and arguments, you don't get graded. You'll also probably be more experienced and prepared, along with your fellow lawyers and
witnesses. The most difficult part of the project for me was answering the direct and cross examination questions. To solve the direct questions problem, I just had to do more research on my character, Jerome Buting. The part I was most nervous about were the cross examination questions because I had no idea what they were going to ask. I researched Jerome Buting excessively and when they asked me the cross examination questions I knew just what to say. If I could do this trial all over again, I wouldn't be a witness, but instead I would be a lawyer because I think that would be very fun, new, and interesting. The part of the project I'm most proud of is our closing statement. I didn't contribute to it, but my team mate did an amazing job writing it and delivering it.
The job of a criminal lawyer is quite difficult. Whether on the defense or the prosecution, you must work diligently and swiftly in order to persuade the jury. Some lawyers play dirty and try to get their client off of the hook even though they are guilty without a doubt. Even though the evidence is all there, the prosecution sometimes just can’t get the one last piece of the puzzle to make the case stick and lock the criminal up. Such is the case Orenthal James Simpson.
O.J. Simpson, a great football hero, made the mistake of his lifetime that becomes the most notorious criminal case ever. Growing up on the West Coast wasn’t serene for Simpson because he was surrounded by gangs. In his high school and college years he quickly rose to be a great football player. During his time he played football in college, he was awarded the Heisman Trophy. After he became an elite athlete in college, he was drafted by the Buffalo Bills. He stayed with them for eight years, then transferred to the San Francisco 49ers (Knapp 1). Simpson met Nicole Brown at Daisy, an upscale Beverly Hills club. The two fell head over heels for each other and got married on February 2, 1985. During their marriage, Simpson inflicted many
Do you think O.J. Simpson should have been found guilty of the murders of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend, Ronald Goldman? Orenthal James Simpson, also known as O.J. or the Juice, used to be known as a running back in the NFL, until he was accused of murdering Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman in June of 1994. Nicole and Ron were found murdered outside of Nicole’s condominium in Los Angeles, California. The trial that attempted to seek justice for Nicole and Ron’s families gained attention across the nation. Many people followed the O.J. Simpson trial to see if the Pro Football Hall of Famer would be found guilty or not guilty of the murders of his ex-wife and her friend. At the end of the trial in October of 1995, Orenthal
The sentencing of underage criminals has remained a logistical and moral issue in the world for a very long time. The issue is brought to our perspective in the documentary Making a Murderer and the audio podcast Serial. When trying to overcome this issue, we ask ourselves, “When should juveniles receive life sentences?” or “Should young inmates be housed with adults?” or “Was the Supreme Court right to make it illegal to sentence a minor to death?”. There are multiple answers to these questions, and it’s necessary to either take a moral or logical approach to the problem.
...s from The Prosecution Function to a real life setting. My tainted movie perception of the criminal justice system no longer exists. While the process does not necessarily always have an unbelievable climax, the excitement lies in the subtle details the opposing counsels must recognize in order to gain an advantage; it truly is a mind game. The immense amount of time and effort that is put forth makes me appreciate the quality of art that lawyers possess. The knowledge and preparation it takes to be successful is astounding, and it is a pleasure to watch.
By working together there is information sharing, improve safety and quality also collaboration gives knowledge to other professionals. (Littlechild and Smith, 2013).what I have learned through working in partnership with other professionals was creating a poster related to what each professional does. Some of the professionals I did not know how exactly they work together in partnership. Example: I was not aware of how a radiology would work with a social work and the outcome of that was that Radiology develop and maintain collaborative relationship with medical colleagues and participates in regular meetings with other professionals activities to meet the needs of a service users therefore they collaborate with Social Workers. By doing a poster and delivering information I learned a lot from the other team members, shared experiences knowledge and skills with other group members. Group work made me realise how it is very important to work in multi-displinary team, the benefit of it and what others can benefit from. During the poster each of the student was from different professional however we all had the question but each had to look at it in each profession perspectives. This gave an opportunity to everyone to go and search for each professional and communicate with the rest of the group the outcome of the presentation. By doing that, we exchanged ideas learned from each other’s skills and used it into practice. I have learned about sharing information with others, learned about communication and
with news and debates about Steven Avery's innocents or guilt. Avery had more than just twenty minutes of fame, but a whole documentary series on Netflix called “How to Make a Murderer”. Avery was convicted for a sexual assault in 1985, but found wrongfully committed after serving 18 years in 2003. He was found innocent by DNA evidence discovered from another sexually assault case matching a man that looked similar to Avery.
Court documents show that the alleged killer at the center of Netflix’s Making a Murderer, Steven Avery, believed that his brothers or other family members possibly framed him for murder. Steven now claimed that it could have been one of his two brothers who killed Teresa Halbach.
“What’s your story?” “Why are you here?” “What happened?” “What have you learned from this class?” “What kind of impact will you have on your society?” These are just a few of the questions Professor Conti made me think about as we stepped into the final weeks of our semester. From that moment on, I knew that within this semester Professor Conti stepped away from the stereotypical classroom. He cares about his students and rather than relying on textbook material; he used their words and experiences in order to develop a very enjoyable and worth while class.
For the first mock trial held in class, the case of the stolen lunch, I did not have a large role. I chose to be a part of the jury, which I feel gave me an immense feeling of responsibility and really allowed me to deeply analyze the case as it was being presented. Within this case, Mary Ovechkin, the plaintiff, had claimed that her lunch had been stolen and ate by the defendant, Sammy Crosby. My first expectation of this case, before it had actually started, was that the defense and prosecution would each have time to present their cases. I expected both sides to question those who were involved, such as the witnesses, defendant, and plaintiff. Then I expected to have to come up with my own verdict to share with the rest of the jury based on the evidence presented. Based on my role, I expected to learn how the jury reaches their decisions.
Wrongful convictions can occur daily all over the world for several reasons. There are many reasons from false statements, police misconduct, false eye witness identification, investigation wrong doings, evidence mishandle and many more issues that force innocent people to be convicted of crimes they never committed. We need to be able to have law officers, eye witness’s whoever is making false statements or identifications or just over looking evidence those individuals need to be punished.
My overall experience in the group was very positive. I learned how to manage my time correctly in order to meet deadlines and also that I have a voice to so use it! Looking back on the group I was with, I would quite happily work with any of them on another project. I think the project went very smoothly. We gathered the relevant information and put the project together in the time we were given. If I was to do this project again I think the only thing I would change is that I would have liked to voice my opinion a bit more as I feel I was a bit too shy at times.
A serial killer has a very deranged way of thinking. They truly believe that “the power to cause pain is the only power that matters, the power to kill and destroy, because if you can’t kill you are always subject to those who can”. The only way they feel they can achieve this is by murdering the “innocent”, for in their eyes the victim is not always so innocent. The victim is usually picked at random or has no personal ties with the killer. But, in most cases, the victims have similar patterns. Some killers produce a hate for women throughout their years because of a past trauma they had with a woman (usually their mother), and so they target women. This can be seen with ________. (TRIGGER PARAGRAPH)
Working together with other people for an assignment can be a challenging task in some cases but luckily, I worked well with my group members. The decisions we made were anonymous although we paced ourselves individually when it came to completing our separate parts of the essay. As a group I believe that we connected well on an interpersonal level as all four of us were able to make alterations to any problem together . Furthermore, we did not give each other a chance to get angry at one another as we knew that this would only cause conflict that would disrupt our flow as a group. There was an equal divide in the amount of work that we all did; our contributions were fair and no one was lacking behind. In addition, my group members were great at keeping each other informed if one of us were not able to attend a group meeting; emails were sent out informing us what we missed and ideas that were formulated. Everyone in my group worked according to deadlines and in synchronization with each other; we did not have to nag anyone to complete work or wait on a member to complete their task.
Michael Sanders, a Professor at Harvard University, gave a lecture titled “Justice: What’s The Right Thing To Do? The Moral Side of Murder” to nearly a thousand student’s in attendance. The lecture touched on two contrasting philosophies of morality. The first philosophy of morality discussed in the lecture is called Consequentialism. This is the view that "the consequences of one 's conduct are the ultimate basis for any judgment about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.” (Consequentialism) This type of moral thinking became known as utilitarianism and was formulated by Jeremy Bentham who basically argues that the most moral thing to do is to bring the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest number of people possible.