Is Steve Harmon innocent or guilty you decide. Steve Harmon is put on trial of the murder of Mr. Nesbitt and the robbery of his drug store. During the trail Steve Harmon is seen as guilty by the prosecutor Sandra Petrocelli. The witness Allen Forbes testimony proves that the gun used in the murder was registered under Mr. Nesbitt. This helps prove that the gun was used in the murder and the robbery and the gun was later found in the store. This witness helped me prove that Steve Harmon could have used the gun to kill Mr. Nesbitt or had taken part in the robbery at some point in the crime. “I went around behind the counter and I saw Mr. Nesbitt on the floor—there was blood everywhere and the cash register was open. A lot of cigarettes were …show more content…
Nesbitt and the robbery. “The states prosecute most crimes against the person, such as murders , assaults and many crimes against property, such as robberies and theft”(https://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/usa/en_usa-int-desc-guide.html). You can be prosecuted in any state for robberies and murders just like what Steve Harmon is put on trial for in the book. As previously mentioned this show that in any state you will be put on trial for robbery and murder. “Therefore, the role of judges in the investigation of criminal offenses is limited”(https://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/usa/en_usa-int-desc-guide.html) . They are just saying that judges don't really have any say whenever it comes to the investigation of criminal offenses but they do some extent. Judging by Steven Harmon’s case he is seen as just a young black man of trial for being an accessory to a murder and robbery that’s all the jury needs to know right? But that’s note true they need to look at all the facts of the case and all the facts tell you that Steve Harmon did in fact take part in the murder of Mr. Nesbitt and the robbery of his drug
The evidence presented to myself and the other juror’s proves that Tyrone Washburn is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of his wife, Elena Washburn. On March 12, 1979 Elena Washburn was strangled in the living room of her family’s home. Her body was then dragged to the garage, leaving a trail of blood from the living room to the place it was found. Her husband, Tyrone Washburn, found her in the family’s garage on March 13, 1979 at 1:45 A.M. When officer Dale Chambers arrived at the scene he found her lying face down in a pool of blood. The solid evidence in this case proves only one person, Tyrone Washburn, is guilty of murder.
Today in criminal convictions, it is prevalent and necessary that there is evidence collected in order to hopefully find and put away the people who committed the crimes. Serology is an important factor that allows this to occur. Serology is the study and identification of bodily fluids such as blood salvia and semen in order to proceed in criminal investigations and legal processes. Blood, saliva, and semen can be readily found in sexual assault and homicide cases. In the case of Dennis Maher, serology is something that should have been considered in order to make a conviction. Instead, none of the evidence that was collected was tested to exclude him, and he was put away in jail based on eyewitness identifications. The crimes that occurred in 1983 ended with Dennis Maher, a solider for the United States, being charged and convicted for rape, assault with intent to rape, assault & battery, and aggravated rape in the year of 1984 based on Eyewitness testimony (NEIP, 2011).
What we do know is that many people think Steve is guilty. One of the guards describes the case, “Six days – maybe seven. It’s a motion case. They go through the motions; then they lock them up” (14). The judicial system has many flaws, one of which being that they assume guilt before proof when it comes to people like Steve. The phrase “innocent until proven guilty” does not apply to cases like his. As prosecutor Petrocelli states in reference to people like Steve, “There are also monsters in our communities – people who are willing to steal and to kill, people who disregard the rights of others” (21). O’Brien succinctly sums this up for Steve, “You’re young, you’re Black, and you’re on ...
The Dread Scott decision exacerbated the debate over slavery by declaring that blacks cannot be citizens and that Congress does not have the power to prohibit slavery in the territories, which further divided the North and the South. The decision also deeply affected politics, and was one of the causes of the Civil War.
John smith, the accused, stood up in the courtroom and started yelling at the judge about what he thought of his innocence irrespective of the decision that the judge would make. He also cursed the prosecutor and kept quiet when his lawyer warned him of the negative consequences that would follow if he continued with the same behavior. Smith did not answer any question that the judge asked him. The prosecutor indicated that he had observed similar behavior when he interviewed him, in jail.
On the morning of December 18, 1992, two brothers were shot and killed in their home in Houston Texas. Police recovered six shotgun shell casings at the home and their investigation led them to defendant Genovevo Salinas who agreed to hand over his weapon for ballistics testing and to go to the police station for questioning. The interview lasted for about one hour, and both parties agree it was noncustodial therefore he was not read his Miranda warning. Salinas answered most of the officer’s questions during the interview, but fell silent and his body tensed up when asked if the shotgun would match the shells recovered at the murder scene. After a few minutes of silence, the officer continued to ask more questions, which he did answer. Salinas did not testify at his own trial and, even with his objection, the prosecution used his silence in response to the officer’s question as evidence that he was guilty.
Steve Harmon is guilty of felony murder because he participated and had knowledge about a crime that ended up in the death of an innocent citizen. The judge stated the if you believe that Steve harmon took part in the crime than you must return a verdict of guilty. I believe that Steve went into the drugstore on that day for the purpose of being a lookout. Some of Steve’s journal entry’s lead to him feeling guilty or like a “monster”.
While he is in jail, he is writing a script for a movie about the trial. The script helps Steve stay calm and not go crazy while he is in jail. Steve and his Defense Attorney, Kathy O’Brien, are trying to prove to the jury that Steve is innocent. Steve is thought to have been working with two other men, James King and Richard “Bobo” Evans. These two people robbed the store and then Steve apparently killed the owner of the store after Bobo and King left.
Both of the boys accusations were very severe. Steve Harmon was being tried for bring an accomplice in a murder/robbery in a convenience store. Even though there's not much information on the arrest itself it was hinted that he was found around the neighborhood and was trying to film for his class when he was arrested .Whereas, Brenton Butler was tried as the killer of an older tourist that was white. Butler was outside by his house when police spotted him, they took him in for questioning just because the description of the murderer was that he was African American. Once arrested they were both introduced to the people who could change their fate in the courtroom.
Both cases have similar charges. Both of the men are young and black and are accused of murder while attempting to rob the victims. Both crimes were committed in a public place with a witness point to the jury they both should be pleaded guilty. An example from the novel, Monster the crime took place at a drugstore. In the documentary, “Murder on A Sunday Morning,” the crime took place at a motel on an early Sunday morning. They both consist of racism by either the jury or the police. From the novel Monster the jury was just looking at Steve Harmon and already assuming him guilty not even listening to the story that goes behind the crime. In the documentary “Murder on A Sunday Morning” the police men were taking Brenton Butler as a suspect for the crime because he was walking on the sidewalk when the crime happened. Both men were pleaded not guilty and then the actual killer came forward and confessed to the
The first evidence is the judge and jury ignored the physical evidence that both men weren’t in area when the crime happen, and their guns were not the same caliber there were a .38 while the gun reported was a .32. The police also had fingerprints from the buick the was used in the South Braintree crime. But the fingerprints didn’t match and the police instead questioned them on their religion, political beliefs and associates instead of the crime. The prosecutors used witness but the witness accounts made no sense. Meaning it didn’t match the descriptions of the men and the their stories weren’t the same and had loops hole. One witness said she saw the shooting from 60 feet away and said one of the men which she said was Sacco had big hands but he had small hands. Another said they saw Sacco kill Berardelli (one of the men who was killed in South Braintree), but the defense question and she said she hidden under workbench when the shots fired and didn’t see the men. The third witness said she talked to a man under a car fixing it as Sacco but her companion said she didn’t talk or saw him. Instead it was a pale sick young man. The day of the crime Sacco was getting a passport. A official confirmed Sacco was their getting a passport but the picture he had was too big. Other witnesses said they saw Vanzetti selling fish in Boston and some even bought some. The last piece of evidence is that the prosecutors tried to convicted them using consciousness of guilt. It is when you are guilty of a crime because you are lying about your actions because you are guilty. They lied and said they didn’t know Mike Boda. They did this because they wanted a car to transport their anarchist pamphlets to a safe place. They wanted to do this because the police could arrest anyone with these pamphlets and the people would be
All of these dealers claimed they were innocent, but one particular defense attorney, Cynthia Barbare, took her client, Jose Luis Vega, at his word. He claimed to be an honest auto mechanic and the dirt under his fingernails led her to believe him. Plus, she found it odd that a reportedly wealthy drug trafficker lived in such a meager home. Her first line of defense was simply requesting that the drug lab test the veracity of the drugs. None of the prior dealers from Alonso’s cases had done so because the Dallas county court system unofficially penalized anyone who requested verification from the drug lab with a much lengthier sentence. The courts had simply relied upon the officers’ field tests. Ultimately, Barbare’s gutsy choice paid off
Secondly Steve had lied under oath when asked if he was in the store that day. This comes up only after the reader reads a little further into the book. In one of Steve’s journal entries on page 40 he says, “I went in to get some gum” . This means that he had lied when he was asked if he was in the store the day the robbery took place. Proving that Steve was guilty at least for contempt of court if not the robbery.
The prosecutions story was that Jeff used his fiancé’s car to leave his work, drive home, and kill his wife. He changed his shirt, and shoes but not his pants. He was unable to see any blood splatters and neglected the key piece of evidence. As he was leaving the house, he received a call from the neighbor which placed him in the vicinity of his home. Back at work, he threw the murder weapon on the roof of a building and finished his shift.
Facts: Richard Gordon escaped from jail, passed three states in the car that they had already stolen; they had two guns in possession. The car that they had started to show engine problems, so they went and looked for another vehicle; they found the Chevelle. Richard Gordon was charged with having committed the crime of "Armed Robbery" He was also accused, with intention to kill, assaulted a police officer. Richard Gordon pleaded not guilty to the charges. He was found guilty of "Armed Robbery."