The document discusses several criminal cases where defendants were found not guilty due to creative legal defenses. These include claiming sleepwalking caused a murder, prosecutorial misconduct concealing evidence, an alibi corroborated by metrocard records, incompetent defense leading to a retrial, mistaken eyewitness identification, and a fire ruled an accident rather than arson. The conclusion argues these cases show murder suspects will say anything to get away with crimes and clever lawyers can convince juries of improbable defenses.
TROY DAVIS - Execution DESPITE RECANTATIONSVogelDenise
- Troy Davis is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday for killing a police officer in 1989, despite significant issues with the case against him. Three of the four key witnesses who testified against him at trial have since recanted, saying they lied under pressure from police. Other witnesses now point to another man as the killer.
- The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 has made it much harder for federal courts to overturn convictions, even in cases like Davis's where witnesses have recanted. This has helped block consideration of the new testimony in Davis's appeals.
- Questions around the fairness of Davis's trial and conviction have led a former FBI director and others beyond normal death penalty opponents to
In 1993, the mutilated bodies of three 8-year-old boys were found in West Memphis, Arkansas. Three teenagers - Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley, and Jason Baldwin - were convicted of the murders based primarily on circumstantial evidence and Misskelley's coerced confession. In 2011, after 17 years in prison, new DNA evidence excluded the three men and implicated new suspects. This case highlights the importance of proper chain of custody and evidence preservation procedures to avoid wrongful convictions and allow for the possibility of exoneration through advances in forensic technology.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY - ProsecutionFollowing A FRAUDULENTLY-OBTAINED ACQUITTALVogelDenise
This document discusses the case of Harry Aleman, who was indicted in 1993 for a 1972 murder he had previously been acquitted of in 1977. The prosecution argued Aleman's original acquittal resulted from a bribed judge and did not constitute true jeopardy, allowing for retrial. An evidentiary hearing found the first trial judge had been bribed, so double jeopardy did not apply. Aleman appealed, raising the issue of whether an acquittal obtained through fraud still protects against retrial under double jeopardy. The document examines this question and concludes the double jeopardy clause bars retrial following an acquittal, even one obtained through bribery or other improper means.
Robert Watts was prosecuted under a 1917 statute prohibiting threats against the President after stating at a public rally that he did not want to kill black people but "if they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J." The Supreme Court reversed his conviction, finding his statement was made in the context of a political debate.
Three men belonging to the Ku Klux Klan burned a cross and were convicted under a Virginia statute prohibiting cross-burning with intent to intimidate. The Supreme Court upheld the statute as constitutional if intent to intimidate is shown.
Andrew Osantowski was convicted of making a terrorist threat for online chat room statements about
A murder suspect's attorney discovered that phone calls between the suspect and his lawyer, which should have been private, may have been recorded by the jail and shared with prosecutors. This would be a serious violation of the suspect's legal rights. Experts say dismissing the indictment against the suspect would be an appropriate response. The jailer later admitted to specifically being instructed by an assistant DA to record the suspect's calls. They recorded conversations for months, which could have included discussion of legal strategy. How the court proceeds could establish an important precedent in protecting suspects' constitutional rights after high-profile cases of prosecutorial misconduct.
Deborah Jeane Palfrey operated an escort agency in Washington D.C. called Pamela Martin and Associates for 13 years. In 2006, she was investigated and convicted of racketeering, money laundering, and using the mail for illegal purposes related to her escort business. Shortly after her conviction, facing years in prison, Palfrey was found dead by suicide. Her death was concluded to be a suicide by autopsy and police investigation.
The document summarizes evidence that suggests a conspiracy in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It discusses the Warren Commission's conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, but notes most Americans don't accept this. It provides possible motives from JFK's targeting of organized crime figures. Witnesses described shots from the Texas School Book Depository and the Grassy Knoll. Analysis of the Zapruder film and autopsy findings suggest shots from the front, inconsistent with Oswald being the sole shooter. Evidence of at least six shots fired contradicts the three shot conclusion. Taken together, this information supports the case for a conspiracy in JFK's assassination.
TROY DAVIS - Execution DESPITE RECANTATIONSVogelDenise
- Troy Davis is scheduled to be executed on Tuesday for killing a police officer in 1989, despite significant issues with the case against him. Three of the four key witnesses who testified against him at trial have since recanted, saying they lied under pressure from police. Other witnesses now point to another man as the killer.
- The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 has made it much harder for federal courts to overturn convictions, even in cases like Davis's where witnesses have recanted. This has helped block consideration of the new testimony in Davis's appeals.
- Questions around the fairness of Davis's trial and conviction have led a former FBI director and others beyond normal death penalty opponents to
In 1993, the mutilated bodies of three 8-year-old boys were found in West Memphis, Arkansas. Three teenagers - Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley, and Jason Baldwin - were convicted of the murders based primarily on circumstantial evidence and Misskelley's coerced confession. In 2011, after 17 years in prison, new DNA evidence excluded the three men and implicated new suspects. This case highlights the importance of proper chain of custody and evidence preservation procedures to avoid wrongful convictions and allow for the possibility of exoneration through advances in forensic technology.
DOUBLE JEOPARDY - ProsecutionFollowing A FRAUDULENTLY-OBTAINED ACQUITTALVogelDenise
This document discusses the case of Harry Aleman, who was indicted in 1993 for a 1972 murder he had previously been acquitted of in 1977. The prosecution argued Aleman's original acquittal resulted from a bribed judge and did not constitute true jeopardy, allowing for retrial. An evidentiary hearing found the first trial judge had been bribed, so double jeopardy did not apply. Aleman appealed, raising the issue of whether an acquittal obtained through fraud still protects against retrial under double jeopardy. The document examines this question and concludes the double jeopardy clause bars retrial following an acquittal, even one obtained through bribery or other improper means.
Robert Watts was prosecuted under a 1917 statute prohibiting threats against the President after stating at a public rally that he did not want to kill black people but "if they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J." The Supreme Court reversed his conviction, finding his statement was made in the context of a political debate.
Three men belonging to the Ku Klux Klan burned a cross and were convicted under a Virginia statute prohibiting cross-burning with intent to intimidate. The Supreme Court upheld the statute as constitutional if intent to intimidate is shown.
Andrew Osantowski was convicted of making a terrorist threat for online chat room statements about
A murder suspect's attorney discovered that phone calls between the suspect and his lawyer, which should have been private, may have been recorded by the jail and shared with prosecutors. This would be a serious violation of the suspect's legal rights. Experts say dismissing the indictment against the suspect would be an appropriate response. The jailer later admitted to specifically being instructed by an assistant DA to record the suspect's calls. They recorded conversations for months, which could have included discussion of legal strategy. How the court proceeds could establish an important precedent in protecting suspects' constitutional rights after high-profile cases of prosecutorial misconduct.
Deborah Jeane Palfrey operated an escort agency in Washington D.C. called Pamela Martin and Associates for 13 years. In 2006, she was investigated and convicted of racketeering, money laundering, and using the mail for illegal purposes related to her escort business. Shortly after her conviction, facing years in prison, Palfrey was found dead by suicide. Her death was concluded to be a suicide by autopsy and police investigation.
The document summarizes evidence that suggests a conspiracy in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. It discusses the Warren Commission's conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, but notes most Americans don't accept this. It provides possible motives from JFK's targeting of organized crime figures. Witnesses described shots from the Texas School Book Depository and the Grassy Knoll. Analysis of the Zapruder film and autopsy findings suggest shots from the front, inconsistent with Oswald being the sole shooter. Evidence of at least six shots fired contradicts the three shot conclusion. Taken together, this information supports the case for a conspiracy in JFK's assassination.
Court case, Darren Chaker provides, Stingrey warrant, requires search warrant, involves privacy, constitutional issues in obtaining phone records and data, Fourth Amendment issues are discussed in detail by the court and how the law looks at cutting edge technology.
This document provides information on four documentary films being screened at a film festival that examine issues related to social justice and law:
1. Scenes of a Crime examines the tactics used by detectives to coerce a confession from a suspect in a child abuse case and questions whether someone can be convinced to confess to a crime they did not commit.
2. Into the Abyss focuses on a triple homicide case and examines the psyches of those involved, including the perpetrators and victims' families.
3. Give Up Tomorrow tells the story of Paco Larrañaga who has been wrongly imprisoned in the Philippines for 14 years for a murder despite evidence of his innocence.
4. Paradise Lost is a
The remains of 2-year old Caylee Anthony were found in woods near her home. Her grandmother reported her missing after 31 days and her daughter Casey's strange behavior. Casey partied in the days after reporting Caylee missing and her car smelled of human decomposition. She was arrested for murder, child abuse, and lying to police. A grand jury indicted her on these charges. At trial, prosecutors presented circumstantial evidence but Casey was acquitted of murder due to reasonable doubt. She was convicted of lying to police.
The True Timeline Behind The People vs. O.J. SimpsonInstant Checkmate
What really happened during the O.J Simpson trial? Instant Checkmate presents a timeline of true events — from the moment the bodies of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman were discovered to the controversial verdict.
For more information about the trial, read the original article (plus an excerpt from O.J. Simpson's book, If I Did It) here: https://www.instantcheckmate.com/crimewire/oj-simpson-timeline-infographic/
RELEASE RUCHELL CINQUE MAGEE, Sole Survivor of the August 7, 1970 Courthouse ...RBG Communiversity
Ruchell Magee is the sole survivor of the 1970 Marin County Courthouse rebellion and has been imprisoned for over 42 years. He was acquitted of serious kidnapping charges related to the rebellion but was convicted of simple kidnapping. A jury foreman and juror have since stated that the jury found Magee not guilty. Magee argues he has been denied parole in violation of California law. He poses no threat if released at age 66 and could mentor youth. He calls for his and all political prisoners' release after over 40 years of imprisonment.
Darren Chaker, confidential informant guide for law enforcement, attorneys, in California, but also cites numerous federal and Supreme Court cases. Privilege is examined, how to keep confidential informants, and numerous court opinions.
This Supreme Court of Georgia case involves Veasa Bun appealing his convictions of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of a sheriff's deputy. Bun received a sentence of life without parole plus 70 additional years. He argued this sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment as a juvenile. The court affirmed the sentence, finding the evidence supported the convictions and precedent has established that life without parole sentences for juveniles can be constitutional. The court also rejected Bun's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Gregory Zilch is charged with second-degree murder for shooting and killing Tavaris Mercer. Zilch's attorney analyzed whether self-defense could be claimed based on the facts of the case and Florida's Stand Your Ground law. The attorney concluded that Zilch has a strong chance of acquittal based on precedent that found George Zimmerman not guilty for similar actions claiming self-defense. The attorney believes Zilch can prove by a preponderance of evidence that he acted in self-defense and is therefore immune from prosecution under Stand Your Ground laws. A motion to dismiss will be filed based on these arguments.
The document discusses the causes and impacts of wrongful convictions. It examines eyewitness misidentification, false confessions due to interrogation pressures, and prosecutorial misconduct as leading causes. It presents the case of Kirk Bloodsworth, the first death row exoneree based on DNA evidence, who served 9 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. On average, exonerees spend 14 years in prison and are 26 years old at the time of their wrongful conviction. There have been 330 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the US.
This document summarizes two high-profile murder trials in the United States - the OJ Simpson trial and the Casey Anthony trial. Both trials resulted in controversial acquittals that highlighted the power of juries to nullify charges despite evidence. The OJ Simpson jury acquitted him of murder charges related to the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman despite DNA evidence. Similarly, the Casey Anthony jury acquitted her of murdering her daughter Caylee, though she was found guilty of lying to police. Both verdicts emphasized the juries' ability to disregard instructions and evidence to reach their own conclusions.
This document is an appellate court opinion regarding a defamation lawsuit filed by Mindi Larue and Jeremy Tucker against David and Sarah Brown. The court affirmed the jury's verdict finding the Browns liable for defamation. It held that while the initial defamatory statements were published over a year before the lawsuit, later comments and responses by the Browns on the website constituted republication of the statements, making the lawsuit timely under the one-year statute of limitations.
Gregg v. Georgia involved Troy Leon Gregg and Floyd Allen who were found guilty of armed robbery and murdering Fred Simmons and Bob Moore. Gregg was sentenced to death in Georgia which was upheld by the state Supreme Court. Gregg then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing his death sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Georgia, establishing a precedent that reinforced the constitutionality of the death penalty.
The document discusses three homicide schemes - common law, Pennsylvania, and the Model Penal Code. It provides definitions and examples of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, and related terms. It also summarizes two court cases - State v. Guthrie and the differing definitions of "deliberate and premeditated" from Schrader and Morrin. The last section discusses aggravating and mitigating circumstances in determining sentencing for first-degree murder under Arizona law.
I'M GOING TO BE A PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL SHOOTERAltaYehuda
The FBI received two tips prior to the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting that could have helped identify and investigate Nikolas Cruz. First, in September 2017, Cruz left a comment on YouTube saying he wanted to become a "professional school shooter" including his real name. The FBI did not properly investigate this tip, failing to trace Cruz's IP address from the comment. Second, in January 2018, a person close to Cruz contacted the FBI tip line with concerns about Cruz's gun ownership, erratic behavior, and plans for a school shooting. This tip also was not properly investigated. If the FBI had followed proper procedures to investigate these tips, they could have identified Cruz as a potential threat and taken action to prevent the February 2018 shooting
Jeffrey Conroy, who was convicted of manslaughter and assault for killing Marcelo Lucero, gave his first interview since being arrested. He insists he is not racist or violent. Conroy received a swastika tattoo as a joke but says it doesn't mean anything to him. He was friends with people of all races in school but acknowledges there were some racists in his peer group. Conroy and his parents express sorrow for Lucero's family and the loss they experienced, though they are still in disbelief over the guilty verdict.
Jarrod Davis was on trial for the second time for the murder of his infant son. The jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, resulting in a hung jury. The prosecution plans to try the case for a third time. The defense argued that the police failed to properly investigate the child's mother, Charla Farrar, as an alternative suspect and claimed Davis was a loving father. The prosecution emphasized Davis' inconsistent statements and that the medical examiner found the infant's injuries were not accidental. Both sides disagreed on whether the evidence clearly pointed to Davis or if it could have also implicated Farrar.
Welcome Return to Draconia 61_Alb_L_Rev_285Kris Druhm
This document summarizes the history of castration as punishment in the United States and discusses recent laws passed in California and other states allowing for chemical or surgical castration of sex offenders. It notes that castration was used in the early 20th century as part of the eugenics movement but was later ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in some cases. Recent court cases involving judges ordering probation terms requiring castration are discussed, with mixed results on appeals. The document analyzes the California law as representative of these new bills and examines potential constitutional challenges.
The Evolution of An Absolute Right: Assignment of Counsel in Criminal Casesjmuhlnic
An analysis of the judiciary decisions leading to the absolute right to counsel for criminal defendants. Evaluates the cases of Powell v. Alabama, Betts v. Brady, and Gideon v. Wainwright in light of the social periods in which they were litigated.
Court case, Darren Chaker provides, Stingrey warrant, requires search warrant, involves privacy, constitutional issues in obtaining phone records and data, Fourth Amendment issues are discussed in detail by the court and how the law looks at cutting edge technology.
This document provides information on four documentary films being screened at a film festival that examine issues related to social justice and law:
1. Scenes of a Crime examines the tactics used by detectives to coerce a confession from a suspect in a child abuse case and questions whether someone can be convinced to confess to a crime they did not commit.
2. Into the Abyss focuses on a triple homicide case and examines the psyches of those involved, including the perpetrators and victims' families.
3. Give Up Tomorrow tells the story of Paco Larrañaga who has been wrongly imprisoned in the Philippines for 14 years for a murder despite evidence of his innocence.
4. Paradise Lost is a
The remains of 2-year old Caylee Anthony were found in woods near her home. Her grandmother reported her missing after 31 days and her daughter Casey's strange behavior. Casey partied in the days after reporting Caylee missing and her car smelled of human decomposition. She was arrested for murder, child abuse, and lying to police. A grand jury indicted her on these charges. At trial, prosecutors presented circumstantial evidence but Casey was acquitted of murder due to reasonable doubt. She was convicted of lying to police.
The True Timeline Behind The People vs. O.J. SimpsonInstant Checkmate
What really happened during the O.J Simpson trial? Instant Checkmate presents a timeline of true events — from the moment the bodies of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman were discovered to the controversial verdict.
For more information about the trial, read the original article (plus an excerpt from O.J. Simpson's book, If I Did It) here: https://www.instantcheckmate.com/crimewire/oj-simpson-timeline-infographic/
RELEASE RUCHELL CINQUE MAGEE, Sole Survivor of the August 7, 1970 Courthouse ...RBG Communiversity
Ruchell Magee is the sole survivor of the 1970 Marin County Courthouse rebellion and has been imprisoned for over 42 years. He was acquitted of serious kidnapping charges related to the rebellion but was convicted of simple kidnapping. A jury foreman and juror have since stated that the jury found Magee not guilty. Magee argues he has been denied parole in violation of California law. He poses no threat if released at age 66 and could mentor youth. He calls for his and all political prisoners' release after over 40 years of imprisonment.
Darren Chaker, confidential informant guide for law enforcement, attorneys, in California, but also cites numerous federal and Supreme Court cases. Privilege is examined, how to keep confidential informants, and numerous court opinions.
This Supreme Court of Georgia case involves Veasa Bun appealing his convictions of malice murder and other crimes in connection with the shooting death of a sheriff's deputy. Bun received a sentence of life without parole plus 70 additional years. He argued this sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment as a juvenile. The court affirmed the sentence, finding the evidence supported the convictions and precedent has established that life without parole sentences for juveniles can be constitutional. The court also rejected Bun's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Gregory Zilch is charged with second-degree murder for shooting and killing Tavaris Mercer. Zilch's attorney analyzed whether self-defense could be claimed based on the facts of the case and Florida's Stand Your Ground law. The attorney concluded that Zilch has a strong chance of acquittal based on precedent that found George Zimmerman not guilty for similar actions claiming self-defense. The attorney believes Zilch can prove by a preponderance of evidence that he acted in self-defense and is therefore immune from prosecution under Stand Your Ground laws. A motion to dismiss will be filed based on these arguments.
The document discusses the causes and impacts of wrongful convictions. It examines eyewitness misidentification, false confessions due to interrogation pressures, and prosecutorial misconduct as leading causes. It presents the case of Kirk Bloodsworth, the first death row exoneree based on DNA evidence, who served 9 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. On average, exonerees spend 14 years in prison and are 26 years old at the time of their wrongful conviction. There have been 330 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the US.
This document summarizes two high-profile murder trials in the United States - the OJ Simpson trial and the Casey Anthony trial. Both trials resulted in controversial acquittals that highlighted the power of juries to nullify charges despite evidence. The OJ Simpson jury acquitted him of murder charges related to the deaths of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman despite DNA evidence. Similarly, the Casey Anthony jury acquitted her of murdering her daughter Caylee, though she was found guilty of lying to police. Both verdicts emphasized the juries' ability to disregard instructions and evidence to reach their own conclusions.
This document is an appellate court opinion regarding a defamation lawsuit filed by Mindi Larue and Jeremy Tucker against David and Sarah Brown. The court affirmed the jury's verdict finding the Browns liable for defamation. It held that while the initial defamatory statements were published over a year before the lawsuit, later comments and responses by the Browns on the website constituted republication of the statements, making the lawsuit timely under the one-year statute of limitations.
Gregg v. Georgia involved Troy Leon Gregg and Floyd Allen who were found guilty of armed robbery and murdering Fred Simmons and Bob Moore. Gregg was sentenced to death in Georgia which was upheld by the state Supreme Court. Gregg then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court arguing his death sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 in favor of Georgia, establishing a precedent that reinforced the constitutionality of the death penalty.
The document discusses three homicide schemes - common law, Pennsylvania, and the Model Penal Code. It provides definitions and examples of first-degree murder, second-degree murder, manslaughter, and related terms. It also summarizes two court cases - State v. Guthrie and the differing definitions of "deliberate and premeditated" from Schrader and Morrin. The last section discusses aggravating and mitigating circumstances in determining sentencing for first-degree murder under Arizona law.
I'M GOING TO BE A PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL SHOOTERAltaYehuda
The FBI received two tips prior to the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting that could have helped identify and investigate Nikolas Cruz. First, in September 2017, Cruz left a comment on YouTube saying he wanted to become a "professional school shooter" including his real name. The FBI did not properly investigate this tip, failing to trace Cruz's IP address from the comment. Second, in January 2018, a person close to Cruz contacted the FBI tip line with concerns about Cruz's gun ownership, erratic behavior, and plans for a school shooting. This tip also was not properly investigated. If the FBI had followed proper procedures to investigate these tips, they could have identified Cruz as a potential threat and taken action to prevent the February 2018 shooting
Jeffrey Conroy, who was convicted of manslaughter and assault for killing Marcelo Lucero, gave his first interview since being arrested. He insists he is not racist or violent. Conroy received a swastika tattoo as a joke but says it doesn't mean anything to him. He was friends with people of all races in school but acknowledges there were some racists in his peer group. Conroy and his parents express sorrow for Lucero's family and the loss they experienced, though they are still in disbelief over the guilty verdict.
Jarrod Davis was on trial for the second time for the murder of his infant son. The jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict, resulting in a hung jury. The prosecution plans to try the case for a third time. The defense argued that the police failed to properly investigate the child's mother, Charla Farrar, as an alternative suspect and claimed Davis was a loving father. The prosecution emphasized Davis' inconsistent statements and that the medical examiner found the infant's injuries were not accidental. Both sides disagreed on whether the evidence clearly pointed to Davis or if it could have also implicated Farrar.
Welcome Return to Draconia 61_Alb_L_Rev_285Kris Druhm
This document summarizes the history of castration as punishment in the United States and discusses recent laws passed in California and other states allowing for chemical or surgical castration of sex offenders. It notes that castration was used in the early 20th century as part of the eugenics movement but was later ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in some cases. Recent court cases involving judges ordering probation terms requiring castration are discussed, with mixed results on appeals. The document analyzes the California law as representative of these new bills and examines potential constitutional challenges.
The Evolution of An Absolute Right: Assignment of Counsel in Criminal Casesjmuhlnic
An analysis of the judiciary decisions leading to the absolute right to counsel for criminal defendants. Evaluates the cases of Powell v. Alabama, Betts v. Brady, and Gideon v. Wainwright in light of the social periods in which they were litigated.
Xem thêm nhiều sách nói và ebook tại đây: (đợi 5s và click vào "skip ads" - "Bỏ qua quảng cáo" trên góc phải màn hình)
http://adf.ly/7180338/businessbook
http://adf.ly/7180338/kho-sach-noi-full
This document provides a setup checklist for a Subiz chat account. The checklist includes registering a Subiz account, confirming email activation, creating chat teams and agents, customizing greetings, widgets, and agent profiles, configuring transcript emails and offline messages, testing the chat, and editing themes.
O documento discute a criação e utilização de vídeos educativos abertos utilizando dispositivos móveis. Apresenta diretrizes sobre formatos de vídeo, ferramentas de edição e plataformas de armazenamento. Também fornece exemplos do processo de gravação de tela, simulações interativas e disponibilização online.
Los motores eléctricos convierten energía eléctrica en energía mecánica, mientras que los generadores eléctricos convierten energía mecánica en energía eléctrica. Ambos dispositivos tienen bobinas que giran en un campo magnético y usan la ley de inducción de Faraday. Los motores de corriente alterna usan la corriente alterna para hacer girar las bobinas, mientras que los generadores de corriente alterna convierten la energía mecánica en una onda de corriente alterna. Los motores y generadores de
La carrera más importante fue la 8a carrera Clásico Casa Histórica de Tucumán, ganada por Imperio Gaucho montado por C. Olivares. La carrera más reñida fue la 9a carrera ganada por Warrior Seek montado por E. Ramirez por solo 3/4 cuerpo sobre Better Prize. El meeting contó con 9 carreras y varios ganadores diferentes.
394C H A P T E R 8Identification of SuspectsLineups .docxgilbertkpeters11344
394
C H A P T E R 8
Identification of Suspects:
Lineups and Showups
Law enforcement may have the elements of a contest about it, but it is not a game.
—JUSTICE BYRON WHITE,
DISSENTING IN MASSIAH V. UNITED STATES, 377 U.S. 201, 213 (1964)
CHAPTER OUTLINE
The Persistence of Mistaken Identification
Identification and the Right to Counsel
The Right to Counsel at Post-indictment Lineups
When Does the Right to Counsel at Lineups Attach?
Does the Right to Counsel Apply to Photographic
Identification?
Identification and the Fifth Amendment
Due Process and Eyewitness Identification
Law in Society: Reducing the Error of Eyewitness
Identification
Understanding Memory and Recall
Toward More Accurate Identification
Improving Lineups
Summary
Legal Puzzles
Justices of the Supreme Court: Nixon’s Conservatives:
Burger and Rehnquist
Warren Earl Burger
William H. Rehnquist
KEY TERMS
cross-examination
exoneration
eyewitness
identification parade
lineup
showup
suggestibility
testimonial evidence
wrongful conviction
THE PERSISTENCE OF MISTAKEN IDENTIFICATION
Eyewitness identification is the most important source of truth in most criminal cases and, ironical-
ly, the leading source of error that results in the conviction of innocent people. The use of eyewit-
nesses at every stage of the criminal process is self-evident. A street mugging victim sits in a police
car and is asked whether a suspect matches her description. A store clerk at a police station lineup is
asked whether each person in the lineup is or is not the armed robber. At a trial, a homeowner sitting
in the witness box is asked to identify the burglar; he raises his arm, points to the person sitting next
to the defense lawyer, and says, “That’s the man; I’d know him anywhere.”
Honestly mistaken identification is recognized by commonsense psychology. An attorney
conducting a cross-examination of an eyewitness in a criminal trial asks commonsense questions
to cast doubt on the accuracy of the witness’s perception. How long did the witness observe the
perpetrator? Was the witness wearing eyeglasses? What were the lighting conditions? The legal
system places great faith in the ability of cross-examination to ferret out the truth. A century ago,
M08_ZALM7613_06_SE_CH08.QXD 1/11/10 7:33 PM Page 394
R
O
D
D
Y
,
A
N
T
H
O
N
Y
I
S
A
A
C
3
7
2
7
B
U
Identification of Suspects: Lineups and Showups 395
Dean John Wigmore of Northwestern University Law School called cross-examination “the
greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.”1 The Supreme Court said that “cross-
examination is the principal means by which the believability of a witness and the truth of his
testimony are tested” (Davis v. Alaska, 1974). Nevertheless, it has been known for a century that
human identification is fraught with error. Classroom experiments by psychologist Hugo
Münsterberg were published in 1908 and dramatically demonstrated that human recall of recent
events is filled with err.
Running Head BRUNO1NEW JERSEY V. BRUNO HAUPTMANN7.docxtoddr4
Running Head: BRUNO
1
NEW JERSEY V. BRUNO HAUPTMANN
7
New Jersey v. Bruno Hauptmann
Bruno Hauptmann born 1889 in Germany. Hauptmann, stowaway to America from Germany had a military and criminal background in Germany. In 1936, he was found guilty of the kidnaping and murder of Charles Lindbergh Jr. Although he was found guilty, Hauptmann has maintained his innocence throughout the trial. Is it possible he was innocent? I will be examining evidence and statements of many parties involved not to determine guilt but proper procedure. Hauptmann had too much evidence against him to be guilty of some crimes, but not enough substantial evidence to be guilty of what he was convicted of.
Incident Summary
On the evening of March 1, 1932, Charles Lindbergh Jr. was abducted. The kidnapper/kidnappers, using a ladder, climbed into the second story nursery room windows, of the Lindbergh’s East Amwell, New Jersey home, taking Charles Lindbergh Jr. Charles Lindbergh Jr. was discovered missing the same evening by the Bessie Goway, the nanny. The Lindbergh’s then notified the local authorities, who then turned the investigation over to the New Jersey State Police.
The Autopsy
The autopsy was supposed to be performed by a county physician Dr. Charles Mitchell. Dr. Mitchell, who suffered from suffered from arthritis guided the county coroner Walter Swayze through the procedure in witness of Dr. Ingen, the child’s pediatrician. The medical examiner concluded that Charles Lindbergh Jr. died from a blow to the head so he could have been murdered in his room or dropped being carried down the ladder. The Autopsy report also determined the child had been dead for two to three months.
The Investigation
H. Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr., superintendent of the New Jersey state police led the investigations. Although in charge Charles Lindbergh Sr., used his fame in power to become the authority in the kidnapping case of his son, interfering with investigative procedures of the New Jersey State Troopers. Investigation of the crime scene turned up the ransom note on an open window sill, muddy footprints in the nursery, a broken ladder some distance from the property, and more footprints leading into the woods, nearby the property. Five days later a second ransom note came through mail demanding 20, 000 more dollars added to the original ransom making it a total of 70,000 dollars. The second ransom note was postmarked from Brooklyn, New York. Further communication was done by newspaper add, and an intermediate was chosen by letter sent to the intermediate directly. The intermediate Dr. John F. Condon received 10 more letters of instructions with multiple delivery methods, negotiations of up to 100,000 dollars. After multiple meetings with the alleged kidnapper, the original 50,000 dollar ransom, mostly of gold certificate money, was handed over and a location to find Charles Lindbergh Jr. was given. The location near Martha’s Vineyard in Massachusetts, which turned up an empt.
Greg Wright was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1997 murder of Donna Vick in Texas. He claimed innocence, arguing his court-appointed attorneys provided ineffective defense. John Adams initially confessed to the crime but later implicated Wright. Supporters argue Wright's innocence is supported by Adams' written confession exonerating Wright and flaws in evidence. Wright was executed in 2008 despite ongoing claims of innocence. The document discusses the morality of capital punishment and euthanasia by considering whether humans have the right to end others' lives.
This document provides a summary of the case facts and legal proceedings in the murder trial of Ronald Williamson. Key points include:
- Debra Carter was found murdered in her apartment in 1982. Ronald Williamson and Dennis Fritz were eventually arrested and convicted based primarily on eyewitness testimony and hair/fiber evidence.
- Williamson received the death penalty. His appeals were denied by the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals and U.S. District Court, finding he received effective counsel despite issues around his mental health not being investigated.
- In 2004, Williamson was exonerated by DNA evidence. He had spent over 18 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. The real killers were never found.
This document provides information about investigating a crime scene. It discusses the roles of the first officer, medical examiner, and crime scene investigation unit. It describes how evidence is collected, including search patterns like spiral, grid, strip, and zone. It explains the importance of chain of custody and documenting the scene through photography and sketches. The document also summarizes two cases, one where a man was convicted of killing his wife and another where a man was initially suspected but later convicted of killing his wife and daughters.
The document summarizes the case of the Grim Sleeper serial killer, Lonnie Franklin. It describes that Franklin killed 230 African American women in Los Angeles between 1985-2007 by seducing them on dates and killing them at his home. His DNA was finally matched to evidence from his last victim in 2007, leading to his arrest and conviction on 10 murder charges. With modern DNA analysis, the case could have been solved much sooner.
05/23/12 - DERSHOWITZ (Prosecutor Should Drop Charges)VogelDenise
The three sentence summary is:
Leftist law professor Alan Dershowitz says the prosecutor in the George Zimmerman case should drop the second-degree murder charge based on evidence that supports Zimmerman's claim of self-defense, including medical records showing Zimmerman's injuries. Dershowitz argues the prosecutor has acted unethically by withholding exculpatory evidence and that if the evidence is valid, she has no choice but to drop the charges to act ethically and professionally. The evidence appears strong enough that Dershowitz believes Zimmerman will likely be acquitted if the case goes to trial.
MATTER OVER MIND ARTICLESection CRIMINAL LAWThe Supreme Court.docxandreecapon
MATTER OVER MIND ARTICLE
Section: CRIMINAL LAW
The Supreme Court Is Poised to Review the Insanity Defense, an Issue That Has Confounded Courts, Psychiatrists and Lawyers
THE 911 CALLS BEGAN COMING JUST BEFORE 5 A.M. on June 21, 2000, from a residential neighborhood in Flagstaff, Ariz. The callers complained of a pickup repeatedly circling the block, blasting music.
Flagstaff police officer Jeff Moritz was dispatched to the area. Moments later, the sounds of at least a half-dozen gunshots pierced the predawn air. By the time the next officers arrived, the neighbors had emerged from their homes and were standing around someone lying in the street.
It was Moritz. One of the shots had struck the young officer and father through the armhole of his bulletproof vest, severing his aorta. He probably died within 30 seconds of being hit.
By day's end, 17-year-old Eric Michael Clark was in custody. In a bench trial three years later, a judge rejected Clark's insanity defense, convicted him of first-degree murder and sent him to prison for 25 years to life.
No one disputes that Clark shot Moritz. And no one denies that Clark, now 23, suffered from paranoid schizophrenia at the time. Nor does anyone say Clark should walk the streets anytime in the foreseeable future. The only question is whether Clark belongs in prison or a mental health facility.
The U.S. Supreme Court may help to answer the question after it hears Clark's challenge to Arizona's stripped-down insanity defense, which Clark says denied him a fair trial by not taking full account of his mental illness.
The case, Clark v. Arizona, No. 05-5966, marks the first time the justices will directly consider whether defendants have a constitutional right to claim insanity as a defense. Oral arguments are scheduled for April 19.
For David and Terry Clark, their son's criminal conviction represented the ultimate contradiction in terms. With one breath, the judge acknowledged Eric Clark's mental illness. With the next, he declared Clark rational and guilty.
"The judge said he was psychotic and delusional, yet he knew what he was doing," David Clark says. "If you look up those words in the dictionary, they don't even go together in the same sentence."
Dan and Janis Moritz couldn't disagree more. They say Clark knew exactly what he was doing when he gunned down their son.
"I think a lot of people are mentally ill, but that certainly shouldn't excuse them of responsibility for what they choose to do," says Dan Moritz, a psychologist with experience in evaluating criminal defendants' competency to stand trial. "I believe child molesters are mentally ill. I believe rapists are mentally ill. They punish them severely, and they should."
MAKING ILLNESS REPLACE INTENT
WHEN THE JUSTICES TAKE UP CLARK'S CASE, THEY WILL delve into an area that not only provokes public outrage at occasional acquittals in high-profile cases but also has long confounded judges, lawyers and jurors.
In a double-edged due p ...
This document summarizes a Supreme Court of Florida case involving Pablo Ibar who was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The court affirmed the convictions and sentences. The document provides background on the facts of the case, including that Ibar and another man were caught on video entering a home and murdering three people. It discusses issues raised in Ibar's appeal and analyzes the admissibility of certain witness identification evidence under Florida statute. The court found that some of the prior witness identifications were improperly admitted as substantive evidence.
Similar to Kga Criminal Law Not Guilty By Reason Of Slick Defense (9)
- Overconsumption by wealthy Western nations is a major cause of global poverty and resource scarcity. Nearly half of the world's population lives on less than $2.50 a day and does not have access to sufficient food, water, shelter or income.
- Unequal distribution of resources, particularly fertile land that is disproportionately occupied by wealthy farmers for export crops, exacerbates poverty. Reducing consumption in wealthy countries and redistributing resources more equitably could significantly diminish global destitution.
- Solutions proposed include land reform policies to make fertile land more affordable and accessible to local farmers, government policies to protect domestic food production, and limiting consumption and waste in wealthy nations to leave more resources available for poorer populations.
This document summarizes research on the causes of serial killing. While some studies have correlated serial murder with childhood abuse or brain deficiencies, the document notes that not all serial killers experience these factors. It discusses research finding both genetic and environmental influences, with diminished brain activity found in certain regions of serial killers' brains. The document concludes that combining biological and psychosocial theories is needed to understand what provokes serial killing and that early signs like animal torture should be addressed with therapy or removing children from abusive homes, despite challenges, in order to prevent future serial murders.
The psychological evaluation analyzes Albert Fish, known as the "Vampire of Brooklyn". He was a serial killer, child molester, and rapist who engaged in sexually deviant acts that escalated to murder over 50 years. He suffered from numerous psychological disorders and paraphilias. Due to the severity and duration of his pathology, effective rehabilitation would have been unlikely. Research indicates intervening early with children exhibiting deviant behaviors can help circumvent them becoming sex offenders.
Criminal investigations require effective communication between various experts from different disciplines like law enforcement, forensic scientists, medical examiners, attorneys and more. The process begins with the 911 call and dispatch sending first responders to the crime scene. Various experts then examine the scene and evidence, sharing their findings. If a suspect is identified, interrogation requires careful listening. The case culminates in a trial where evidence and witness testimony are presented for the jury's deliberation. Effective communication throughout is essential to identify the perpetrator.
The passage discusses the history and evolution of the US prison system from the early 19th century to today. It describes different eras such as the Reformatory Era, Industrial Prisons period, and Modern Era. Currently, issues like overcrowding, high costs, and recidivism persist due to mass incarceration. To address these issues in the future, the passage recommends downsizing prisons, reducing sentences for nonviolent crimes, increasing education and rehabilitation programs, and reforming parole/probation policies.
The document summarizes the multi-step forensic investigation process required to solve a murder case. It involves collecting evidence from the crime scene by various experts, analyzing the evidence in a crime lab, performing an autopsy on the victim, developing a criminal profile, and ultimately interrogating suspects. The goal is to piece together all the evidence like a puzzle to identify the killer and bring them to justice. It is a lengthy, complex, and meticulous team effort requiring many different experts with different specializations.
Kga Criminal Law Not Guilty By Reason Of Slick Defense
1. Tori Kelly<br />17 November2010<br />Criminal Law<br />Mr. Kashirsky<br />KGA #1 ESSAY<br />NOT GUILTY BY REASON OF SLICK DEFENSE<br />Not Guilty by Reason of Slick Defense<br />How do people like O.J. Simpson get away with murder? Ever since mankind roamed the Earth, murder has been a part of life. Once we became civilized it was considered a serious crime. With the adoption of the court system, we have developed legal defenses that justify taking another person’s life. Defense attorneys have come up with very convincing arguments that let sadistic killers get away with murder. It takes a unanimous decision of twelve jurors to result in a conviction, and only one to “rock the boat.” As described in these six different murder cases, all it takes to persuade one person to vote not-guilty is a clever defense. <br /> Homicidal Somnambulism<br />In the Steven Stienberg case, (Scottsdale, Arizona, 1981) Steven was accused of murdering his wife with a kitchen knife. Mrs. Stienberg was stabbed 26 times. Mr. Stienberg told police that intruders had killed her during a burglary gone awry. In 1982, in the Maricopa County Superior Court, Steven testified that he acknowledged the murder, but that he did it while sleepwalking, couldn’t remember the crime, and therefore, was not guilty. His story changed dramatically from what he originally told police, which raised doubt on the prosecutor’s side. <br />A California psychiatrist, Dr. Martin Blinder stated that the murder was committed under “dissociative reaction”. The plea was changed to not guilty due to temporary insanity. The jury believed Steinberg was sleepwalking, and therefore was not responsible for bludgeoning his wife Elana. He was exonerated of his murder charge CITATION sle09 1033 (Sleepwalking: Definition from Answers.com, 2009). This defense is very convenient and convincing.<br />Since the first recorded case in 1846, 68 more cases resulted in acquittal using sleepwalking as a defense. Things are now different under Arizona law. Since 1994, judges have had to impose “guilty but insane” to sentences which were formerly based on “temporary insanity”. Now the murderers must serve a sentence in a mental institution, which may last as long as if they went to prison. CITATION sle09 1033 (Sleepwalking: Definition from Answers.com, 2009) <br /> Prosecutorial Misconduct<br />In United States v. Koubriti, et al., an indictment charging four individuals with involvement in the 9/11 attacks, was the first post 9/11 case to go to trial. The defense alleged that the government knowingly concealed and misused evidence. The Justice Department conducted a nine month internal review which revealed that prosecutors railroaded the defendants to prison, concealing dozens of pieces of exculpatory evidence that should have been given to defense attorneys at the trial. Judge Rosen ordered a new trial for the three men in which they will only face the least serious charged (which they were also previously charged) of document fraud.<br />In his ruling, Judge Rosen noted the understandable governments’ need to obtain a conviction of these Arab and Islamic suspects due to the wake of the 9/11 attacks, but that it impaired their professional judgment, their obligation to the justice system, and the rule of the law. Farouk Ali-Haimoud, Ahmed Hannan, Karim Koubriti, and Abdel llah Elmardoudi were charged with operating an Islamic sleeper cell. Elmardoudi and Koubriti were convicted of conspiring to provide material to support terrorists and document fraud, Hannan of document fraud, and Haimoud was acquitted of all charges CITATION Kar03 1033 (Karim Koubriti, 2003). Despite the court’s decision, the fact that they were providing materials to support terrorism made them accomplices to murder.<br /> Metro Card Alibi<br />In May, 2009, Jason and Corey Jones were charged with fatally shooting a man near the Yankee stadium because he had been a government witness in drug and gun cases. A government witness told police that the brothers shot the man. Others stated the brothers were elsewhere. A few months later, the defense attorney asked New York City Transit to trace his movements using his metro card. The results corroborated with Mr. Jones statement that he used it on a bus and later a subway approximately five miles from the shooting. There was no video to back this up CITATION Aft08 1033 (After Metrocard Alibi murder charges are dropped-NY Times.com, 2008). Despite that five miles is close enough for someone else to use the card and return it to Mr. Jones, the prosecutors dropped charges anyway.<br />Incompetent Defense<br /> George A. McCutcheon was convicted of murdering his friend in November, 1986, by the Orange County Superior Court jury in 2009. He said he fired in self defense over an argument about a television. McCutcheon appealed his conviction on the premise that his defense attorney failed to represent his story properly at the trial. The 4th District Court of Appeal in Santa Ana faulted defense attorney James S. Odriozola for failure to explore the defendant’s drunken state at the time of the shooting, failing to ask the jury for a lesser verdict of assault, and for other tactical errors during the initial defense. The court found that “had McCutcheon been represented by competent, well-prepared council, the probability is high he would have achieved a dramatically better result” CITATION Inc88 1033 (Incompetent Defense ruled in Trabuco Case-LA Times, 1988) The probability is high that he knew he could use this incompetence to his advantage, rather than demand that his defense attorney represent him properly during the first trial.<br />Mistaken Identity<br />On October 13, 1987, five men were shot and killed in an auto repair shop in Spokane. Misael Barajas, Juan Antonio Garcia, Eliceo Lamas, Rafael Magollin, and Francisco Cortez. Aldo Montes was the only survivor, who identified Vicente Ruiz as the shooter from a collection of six photos. Evidence collected from several different locations also implicated Ruiz. Defense lawyer Bob Thompson said police got the wrong man. He states the motive for the murders were drug dealing and trafficking, counterfeiting and money laundering, yet nothing points to Ruiz playing a role in it. Thompson said it’s a case of mistaken identification, and that although evidence shows he was at the scene, there was no evidence he pulled the trigger. <br /> Ruiz was taken into custody by Pasco police in October, 2007, at Los Angeles International Airport. He denied any involvement in the shootings, and when investigators asked him why he left for Mexico 23 years ago he stated he was on a long vacation. <br />After two mistrials, the case has been moved to Spokane County, which started November 9, 2010, and is expected to last through December CITATION Mis10 1033 (Mistaken identity, Ruiz defense says, 2010). It is interesting how evidence placed him at the scene, as well as an eyewitness, and he didn’t fire a shot, and there’s no other evidence that point to who did. (I think I need a vacation…)<br />“Flashover” Fire<br />November 20, 1981, in Prescott, Arizona, Ray Girdler’s wife, Sherrie and his three year-old daughter, Jennifer died in their burning home. He was the only survivor and was convicted of murder by arson in 1982. At that time state fire marshal, David Dale testified that ignited gasoline around the victims caused the blaze. Girdler was sentenced to 71 years in Arizona State Prison by Yavapai County Superior Court Judge, James Sult, for 2 counts of arson murder and one count of arson.<br />September, 1990, defense attorney Hammond represented Girdler in a new trial that was allowed based on new evidence. Defense experts argued that Girdler’s home was not torched by arson, but destroyed by a newfound phenomenon known as “flashover” fire. Experts explain that this occurs when hot gases produced in the beginning of a fire collect and build heat at the ceiling level. When the temperature of those gases reaches approximately 1,100 degrees Fahrenheit, everything in the room catches on fire. Furthermore, it mimics the results of an arson fire ignited by liquid accelerants. They said a smoldering cigarette or a homemade electrical appliance started the blaze. <br />State fire marshal Dale said that during the initial hearing he knew of the phenomenon in 1982 and had ruled out the possibility. At the new trial he testified he still believed Girdler <br />intentionally poured gasoline around his wife and daughter. Charges were reversed regardless of Dale’s testimony, as Judge Sult tossed out the murder conviction CITATION Dow90 1033 (Down in Flames Judge Tosses Out Murder conviction in 1981Prescott Arson Case, 1990). Ray Girdler was fortunate that this ”flashover” fire phenomenon existed in order to burn the truth.<br /> Conclusion<br />Murder suspects will say anything to get away with it. Some defense attorneys are clever enough to make a jury believe just about anything. Many cases are being retried, based on new “evidence” which is nothing more than creative defense tactics, used to let killers get away with murder.<br />Bibliography<br /> BIBLIOGRAPHY 1033 (n.d.).<br />(1988, Dec 16). Retrieved Nov 15, 2010, from Incompetent Defense ruled in Trabuco Case-LA Times: articles.latimes.com/1988-12-16/local/me202_1_trabuco<br />(1990, Sept 19). Retrieved Nov 15, 2010, from Down in Flames Judge Tosses Out Murder conviction in 1981Prescott Arson Case: www.phoenixnewtimes.com/content/printVersion158965<br />(2003, Dec 31). Retrieved Nov 15, 2010, from Karim Koubriti: www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=karim-koubriti<br />(2008, Dec 31). Retrieved Nov 1cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com2008/12/31/after-metrocard, 2010, from After Metrocard Alibi murder charges are dropped-NY Times.com.<br />(2009). Retrieved November 05, 2010, from Sleepwalking: Definition from Answers.com: www.answers.com/topic/sleepwalking<br />(2010, Nov 18). Retrieved Nov 20, 2010, from Mistaken identity, Ruiz defense says: www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/11/18/1257419/mistaken<br />