South Carolina ex-trooper Sean Groubert pleaded guilty Monday and is charged with assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature in the 2014 shooting of an unarmed black man. According to the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, on September,4, 2014 Trooper Sean Groubert stopped Levar Jones for a seat belt violation at a convenience store. Jones, who was unarmed, was hit in the hip with a bullet, police said. He can be heard saying, "I just got my license. You said get my license.", according to ABC News Sean Groubert was lead out of the South Carolina courtroom in handcuffs after the judge accepted his plea, although he will not be taken into custody until his sentencing at a later date. If convicted Groubert could face …show more content…
He constantly turned and twisted a Rubik's Cube, perhaps to calm himself. As prosecutors replayed the video of the shooting taken from Groubert's dashboard camera, Jones' shoulders jerked, according to ABC News. Levar Jones did not speak at the hearing that lasted about 20-minutes on Monday, although prosecutors do believe he will speak at the sentencing. The only evidence the prosecutors provided at the hearing Monday was the dash cam video and a statement that Groubert made a week after the shooting. The video showed Groubert pulling up to Jones without his siren on for a seatbelt violation during afternoon rush hour. Both men get out of their cars at a convenience store and the trooper asked Jones for his license. Jones said he took off his seatbelt because he was stopping at the store after work. The video shows Jones turning and reaching back into his car, and Groubert shouts, "Get outta the car, get outta the car." He begins firing and unloads a third shot as Jones staggers away, backing up with his hands raised, and then a fourth. Jones' wallet can be seen flying out of his hands. “Why did you shoot me?”, Jones asked the trooper as he lay on the pavement waiting for an ambulance to
Not guilty was the decision made by the jury during the George Zimmerman vs. Trayvon Martin trial. That verdict may have been the most controversial one of recent time. Many people were upset by the decision and felt that justice was not achieved for the young victim, Martin who was seventeen years old when he was killed. This incident seems to be a tragic example of stereotyping and racial profiling. It is also an example of how a verdict, based on the strict interpretation of the law can be the wrong verdict.
far as the story tells, he never showed any sort of emotion before the shooting
In the opening statements both side of the case make opening statements to lay the foundation of their cases. Opening statements are not allowed to be argumentative and cannot be considered evidence by the jury; they are the road maps laying out where each side intends to take its case. First the prosecution presented its case. They alleged Peterson killed his wife in their Modesto home because he was having an affair, then drove her body nearly 100 miles to San Francisco Bay and heaved it overboard from his small boat. Prosecution offered a steady drum beat of small bits of circumstantial evidence. From the Russian poetry Peterson read his mistress to the fishing gear in his alibi to the dessert featured on a particular episode of Martha Stewart Living, it added up to Peterson's guilt, they suggested. The defense countered that Modesto authorities unfairly targeted Peterson, ignoring important leads that didn't fit their theory. Defense said that, while prosecutors had only assembled a circumstantial case, they had five witnesses that were direct evidence of Peterson's innocence.
Justice was not served in the controversial nature of the Bernhard Goetz subway shooting trial. After shooting four black teenagers, Bernhard Goetz turned himself into the police in Concord, New Hampshire. He was denominated, “The Subway Vigilante”. This case was brought to court approximately two years later, where Bernhard Goetz would ultimately be voted guilty of one count of illegal firearms possession, and served just six months in jail. Following the trials, questions are still being asked if justice has been served.
In the film, A Civil Action, Trial Procedure was shown throughout the entire movie. There are many steps that need to be completed before a verdict and judgment can be reached. These steps are the pleadings, methods of discovery, pretrial hearings, jury selection, opening statements, introduction of evidence, cross examinations, closing arguments, instructions to the jury, and the verdict and judgment. The case in this movie was actually called Anderson v. Cryovac. The plaintiffs are the Anderson family, the Gamache family, the Kane family, the Robbins family, the Toomey family, and the Zona family. The plaintiffs’ attorneys are Jan Schlichtmann, Joe Mulligan, Anthony Roisman, Charlie Nesson, and Kevin Conway. The two co- defendants are W.R. Grace and Beatrice Foods. The two co-defendants’ attorneys are William Cheeseman, Jerome Facher, Neil Jacobs, and Michael Keating.
Upon further review of the evidence in the case, it was explained that Gordon fastened Cheyenne into the seat while she was asleep. This statement seems to eliminate any theory of infants negligence immediately since she was not the one to fasten the seat belt, in addition to her age barring recovery for infants negligence. When placing her into the vehicle he noted that the shoulder portion of the strap fell over her neck and head, allowing for a large amount of slack. Gordon’s direct statement indicates that he knew the seat belt was too large for Cheyenne, however he still placed her in the seat. It is unclear whether Gordon placed the strap behind Cheyenne’s back, or if some time during the ride Cheyenne placed the excess length of belt behind her own back. Since she
- on June 23, Williams was driving when a heavy car came up from behind him and tried to force his car off the embankment and over a cliff with a 75 ft. drop off. The bumpers of the two cars were stuck and the cars had to pass right by a highway patrol station, which was a 35 mile and hour zone, but the car was pushing his at 70 miles per hour. Williams started blowing his horn hoping to attract the attention of the patrolmen, but when they saw they just lifted their hands and laughed. He was finally able to rock loose from the other car’s bumper and make a sharp turn into a ditch. He went to the police about it, but they would not do anything because he was black. The police in Monroe never did anything to help blacks
Terrance Graham was sixteen years old when he first committed armed burglary in Florida and was sentenced to three years of probation by the Florida Court. A year later, Graham committed another crime of robbery before he turned to eighteen years old. Since it was within the prosecutor’s discretion whether to charge 16-and 17-year-olds as adults or juveniles for felony crimes under the Florida Law, the prosecutor elected to charge Graham as an adult. The Florida
Unlike Halford and Britt in which the defendant’s licenses were suspended for not appearing in court and maintaining insurance, which were all administrative in nature, Haley’s suspension of her driver’s license was more about her failure to obey. Haley had three tickets for failure to obey construction zone marker for three consecutive days and one for disregarding traffic control device. Compare to the violations of procedural issues in Halford, the violation in this case were more related to driving issues. Parking in the wrong spot could be the result of not be able to park in the right spot which crowed by other
First, Halbach’s remains in the fire pit were discovered on Avery’s property. In an email from Ken Krats (The District Attorney of Calumet County) during the investigation, he states that there was a tooth which was ID’d through Halbach’s dental records in the fire pit. Along with the tooth, a rivet from her jeans was also found (Willett). A counter claim in the case is that it might not have been Halbach’s remains. The remains, however, were identified through dental records, so there was no doubt that it was indeed the remains of Halbach on his property. These remains were where they were also aligned with the statements given in Brenden Dassey’s confession. Second, The bullet found in the garage had her evidence on it, and was fired from Avery’s gun. According to Willett, “In Avery’s garage, police found a bullet that had Halbach’s DNA on it. Katz said in the email that the ballistics proved the bullet was shot from Avery’s rifle that police had confiscated back when they first searched the property” (Willett). The bullet is difficult evidence to ignore. Not only was it found in his garage, but it was deduced that it was fired out of Avery’s gun that he keeps in his room. For the bullet to have been planted, someone would have had to fire a bullet out of Avery’s rifle, place Halbach’s DNA on it, and then plant it in his garage. Third, Avery’s DNA was found in various places on the scene. Avery’s sweat was found under the hood of Halbach’s car, and on Halbach’s car keys (Watt). Avery’s sweat being where it was matched perfectly with Brenden Dassey’s confession, because Dassey described a specific event where Avery had to open the hood to reset the odometer. The police only had access to his blood, so there is not anyway that they could have planted his sweat. The only way for Avery’s sweat to have gotten there would be from him touching it. The evidence found in the fire pit, the garage, and Halbach’s
Randall Jones has been arrested and charged with murder after he decided to begin firing bullets at partygoers who were having a good time during the early morning hours. Jones, who lived in the house with several other roommates, stated that he did not intend for the incident to take place.
Upon hearing David and Betty’s refusal, the man pulled out a gun, and fired a round into the right rear window, shattering it with incredible force. He then moved to the front of the car and fired another round into the left tire. Stricken with panic, David and Betty rushed out of the car, but the man was there to meet them. Betty was able to scramble out, but David wasn’t so lucky, as he was met with the cold, hard barrel of a gun pressing behind his left ear. "The shot made a deafening blast, as the bullet entered David’s head at a horizontal angle, blowing it apart" (Tina 3).
As we cruised around the community, he pointed out countless minor traffic violations, both moving and non-moving, but opted not to make any stops. At this point he stated his main concern was to spot any impaired drivers and get them off the road. Eventually, as we came up behind an older civic (the Civic had a broken brake light) on Centreville Road, the officer stated that he detected the scent of marijuana coming from the Civic. The driver of the Civic noticed Crutchman’s police cruiser behind him and dropped his speed to 5 mph under the posted limit. Officer Crutchman began tailing the vehicle which immediately turned off on the next available road. We proceeded to follow the Civic for a couple of miles. I could tell that Officer Crutchman wanted to make the stop, and I inquired why he hadn’t done so already on account of the Civic’s faulty brake light. He responded that he is cautious about making such stops because he does not want a “new law named after him” on account of the controversy surrounding pretextual stops. It is possible that this careful attitude has developed as a result of the rising public outcry against police and
In the Blue Cut Robbery scene, Jesse first starts to lose control when he is refused the safe’s password when they board. When the train clerk says no to giving the code to one of his crew hits the train clerk with the but of his gun. At this point the director zooms up on Jesse's face and he doesn’t look as calm as usual, he has this surprised face, probably because someone has just denied him something. After the refusal of the code Jesse start to get