The Trials Of The Nuremberg Trials

The Trials Of The Nuremberg Trials
It is a pleasant autumn day in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in 1960. Suddenly, agents from Israel's
intelligence agency, Mossad, tackled a man to the ground (Lichtblau, The Nazis Next Door 68).
Unbeknownst to spectators, that man was Adolf Eichmann, aide to the Fascist dictator Adolf Hitler.
Along with Hitler and other Third Reich Nazis, he had organized the Holocaust–a massive genocide
murdering eleven million people. How is it possible that, after all of these years, Eichmann
remained hidden? How is it possible that the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, which were held by the
Allied Powers after World War II, did not execute this man? The Nuremberg Trials were a series of
thirteen trials held between 1945 and 1949 to prosecute some Nazi war criminals. The trials were
held in Nuremberg, Germany, because its courthouse was not damaged from the war. The four
Allied Powers held the hearings, and the best–known trial was the Trial of Major War Criminals
("Nuremberg Trials"). The fact of the matter is that not many Nazis were actually convicted in the
Nuremberg Trials, even though these court proceedings were supposed to bring Nazis to justice.
Overall, the Nuremberg Trials were not effective in prosecuting Nazi war criminals. This is because
few Nazis were executed, many fled to South America, the U.S. enlisted them as spies, and they
became top scientists in the United States Space Program.
One reason why the Nuremberg Trials were not effective is because only ten Nazis were
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

The Trial : Difference Of Gender
The Trial: Difference of Gender There are myriads of differences when it comes to gender within
the trial of Thomas and Jane Weir. Women were usually domestic workers within the household and
society, doing jobs such as child–rearing, weaving, and roles of mother, sister, daughter, wife and
caretaker in the community. Men were either seen as the husbands of the female witchcraft users or
someone of an intense authority figure. "Sir Andrew Ramsay, Lord Abbotshall then Provost of
Edinburgh" were all men with high statuses within the community in Edinburgh in which Thomas
lived. Women during the time of witchcraft in Scotland came to be connected with the Devil by
possession . Most men did not have carnal knowledge of the work of the Devil himself but rather
with a female witch who has the connection to the Devil. Since women were seen as the prominent
members of the witchcraft community, there can possibly be multiple differences between the
testimony and charges laid against Jane and Thomas Weir. Thomas was charged with incest,
adultery, fornications and bestiality because he laid with his sister and multiple people within the
community in which he lives. His sister, Jane, was connected in the incest with her brother, and was
also thoroughly prosecuted for sorcery which has an equal if not worse punishment than Thomas'
crimes. "She is also [indicted] of [Sorceries] committed by her when she lived and [kept] a school at
Dalkeith. That she took employment from a Woman to speak

Essay about Justice On Trial in Kafka's The Trial
Justice On Trial in Kafka's The Trial
There is no such thing as justice – in or out of court. Clarence Darrow i
Most often critically interpreted as a search for Divine justice, Kafka's The Trial, a fragmented and
unfinished novel, appears to leave us with the same impression as the words above of Clarence
Darrow. In other words, there is no justice. This assessment of Divine justice by Kafka works on
two levels. On one level, he is illustrating the helpless nature of the individual when in conflict
against an established bureaucracy. On another level, he is illustrating the existential dilemma of
man in the face of a godless, indifferent, and often hostile universe. A search for justice by Josef K.
finds no justice in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
as he attempts to maneuver the bureaucratic system. In vain, much as many people try to find
meaning and justice out of court, Josef K.'s efforts to discover why he is accused and must suffer are
in vain. Yet, his character and his sins are conventional, and he has no bold or threatening ambitions.
All he can do is ask questions, but he receives no answers that would clarify the bureaucratic system
into which he has been thrust. Just like existential awareness undermines the entire rational structure
of Divine justice, so, too, the alternative hypotheses, the multiple explanations, the different
interpretations, and the uncertainty Josef K. experiences, serve to undermine the whole rational
structure of the justice system. Josef K. comes to understand the socially constructed, arbitrary, and
absurd nature of the justice system, and, justice itself "The truth allegedly resides above the realms
of justice and injustice."iii This literary analysis will focus on how Josef K.'s experiences in The
Trial demonstrate not only the corrupt justice system of the era but also the absurd and futile attempt
to seek an arbitrary concept like justice in an existential realm.
KAFKA WORLDVIEW OF JUSTICE IN THE TRIAL
The Trial has an immediate ability to engage the emotions of the reader because the protagonist,
Josef K., is an everyman. Not especially ambitious, Josef K. is an ordinary man, a successful bank
clerk whose everyday

Essay On Jury Trial
A trial by jury or jury trial is a legal proceeding where a jury either makes a finding of a fact or a
decision, which then direct the actions of the judge. It is different from a bench trial where a panel
of judges makes all decisions. It consists of five steps: the selection of the jury, the trial, the charge
of the magistrate, deliberation and then the verdict.
The choice of the jury is the first and crucial step. The jurors selected must be fair and not biased. In
selecting a fair jury, first is to have a venire or a fair jury pool.It is a potential juror assembled for
jury duty. They chose a jury for a criminal trial from the venire. A voir dire process takes place to
select the jurors. It is a questioning process for the citizens before the selection to hear evidence as
jurors. The jurors are then challenged for the cause and peremptory. A challenge is a request by an
attorney to disqualify potential–biased jurors. A challenge for cause is an application to dismiss a
potential juror based on a concrete and stated reason, which usually revolves around the actual or
possible bias of the person. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The attorneys give their opening statements. The openings statements are the outlines of the
imminent proof to be presented to the jury on trial. They are not evidence, but a prototype of what
their testimony would lean on. The accused has a right to impartial judge. Offenders are entitled to a
speedy trial though there is not the exact time limit. If the judge feels the trial has been delayed, he
or she can throw it out. The span and motive for the deferral are analyzed, and a decision is made.
At this stage, witnesses are summoned for direct and cross–examination. Prosecution's case is
presented first. One side calls their witness for direct examination then the other hand cross–
examines them. After the hearing and presentation of facts, the attorneys make their closing

Explain The Stages Of A Criminal Trial
Criminal trials have stages which include approximately thirteen stages. The stages are as follows;
1). The defendant goes to trial. 2). Discovery proceedings. 3). Motions filed 4). Trial begins. 5).
Opening statements. 6). Prosecutor's case. 7). Presentation of evidence. 8). Defendant's case. 9).
Prosecutor's rebuttal case. 10). Closing arguments. 11). Jury instructions. 12). Deliberations. 13).
Verdict. These stages do not occur in every trial although they are listed.
Lets' define the stages for clarity and knowledge. The defendant goes to the court room to stand trial
after jury selection and all preliminary proceedings are completed. The proceedings are requested to
identify the prosecutor's evidence to the courts and motions are filed and then the trial begins. The
opening statements by the prosecutor are simply outlining the case for the jury and the court. The
defense team is not required to make an opening statement in most cases. The prosecutor proceeds
to submit evidence and proceed with the questioning of witnesses and as they proceed, they are
required to present without a reasonable doubt, all components of the crime. ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
In most cases the defense would motion for a dismissal and wait for the judge to rule. But if they
choose to proceed with the trial, they start requesting witnesses to question and make their case to
the jury and the court. Then the rebuttal period is next, where the prosecutor and the defense are
cross examining witnesses, trying to prove each other's proof of evidence or lack of evidence and
maybe reexamine some witnesses for clarity. Then the defense will summarize their case and then
the prosecutor will have the final summary of their case and then the judge starts instructing the

Mock Trial Analysis
The mock trial was a great an overall a great experience, I truly did enjoy it. In my opinion,
everything went well, first of all, everyone was respectful and patient.This was my first time doing
any time of trial so at first, I was nervous but the atmosphere the room was calm which helped me
feel better. Everyone hard work and preparation for the trail truly stood out as both sides had
amazing opening and closing statements.The prosecutor's all had questions that were specific and
with a purpose.I proud of the fact that I was prepared to answer most of the questions and was well
prepared.However I most proud of Hermiela her opening statement was very impressive.During the
trail, this one person kept saying "relevance" through the trail which

Jury Trial Vs Bench Trial
In today's society of law it is preferable to have a jury trial than a bench trial. For many reasons a
jury trial is preferable than a bench trial because there are 12 mind's that decide if the defendant is
guilty or not. The defendant only needs one juror to save their life because it would be a hung jury.
The jurors need to be 12 to zero to have the defendant guilty or not guilty. It is easier to have a jury
a trial than a bench trial because in a bench trial the defendant has to look like they did the crime
while in a jury trial 12 jurors are hearing the testimony and they could decide from there if the
defendant is guilty or not. All the jurors need is a reasonable doubt to say the defendant is not guilty
while the bench trial the judge ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
A bench trial, the judge only hears the facts, evidence, and if the defendant looks like they did it.
One juror could save a defendant's life because in 12 Angry Men it stated, "There were eleven votes
for guilty. It's not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it
first." Juror number eight has a point in a jury trial. It is not easy to vote for guilty. He had a
reasonable doubt to vote not guilty. "I don't know" it stated in 12 Angry Men. Juror number 8 just
wanted to talk about the situation. This is a reason why a jury trial is more preferable a judge
wouldn't hesitate and give the defendant life in imprisonment. With all the evidence given a judge
would have had a final verdict by now. One man stood up and helped the defendant to find him not
guilty. This could happen anywhere in a jury trial. If anything jurors could change their vote to not
guilty to guilty or the other way around. In a jury trial the jurors could change their vote. "
FOREMAN. I vote guilty. Number two?TWO. Not guilty. FOREMAN. Number Three?THREE.
Guilty. FOREMAN. Number Four?FOUR. Guilty.FOREMAN. Number Five? FIVE. Not guilty.
FOREMAN. Number Six? SIX. Not guilty. FOREMAN. Number Seven? SEVEN.
Guilty.FOREMAN. Number Eight?EIGHT. Not guilty.FOREMAN. Number Nine?NINE. Not
guilty. FOREMAN. Number Ten?TEN. Guilty .FOREMAN. Number Eleven? ELEVEN. Not guilty.
FOREMAN. Number Twelve? TWELVE. Guilty. FOUR. Six to six." They all voted not guilty it
was all tied up. In conclusion a jury trial is more preferable than a bench trial because in a jury trial
anything could happen. The jurors need a reasonable doubt to vote not guilty. The juror could say I
do not know and that os enough to say not guilty. A bench trial, the judge, would have had a final
verdict with all

Essay on Franz Kafka's The Trial
Franz Kafka's famously translated novel The Trial was thought by many to be strongly influenced
by his strong background and affiliations with theater and literature. Within the novel, Kafka refers
to various types of the art form including, physical art, performing arts and acting, and the art of
how a person moves and/or interacts with others. Critics have argued that Kafka's background was
the influence to the novel, while others strongly disagree. Was Kafka's references to the performing
arts within the novel his way of portraying life as a play, something that is scripted and planned out
or was it simply the main character treating his situation as an unrealistic event and a joke?
Franz Kafka always had a strong background in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In the same chapter a few pages later, we see an audience appear once again but this time it grew
into a slightly larger group. Kafka wrote, "Across the way, the old couple were again at the window,
but their party had increased in number, for towering behind them stood a man with his shirt open at
the chest, pinching and twisting his reddish goatee" (Kafka, 13). In keeping with the theme of
performing arts and the idea stated by the critics of Kafka using the Yiddish performance as his
inspiration for this novel, the use of the couple in the window is left up to the readers own ideas and
interpretations to determine why they are used just this once and never brought back up again.
Personally, I interpreted this scene as Kafka using these characters like an audience to a
performance, whether that be the actual meaning for them or not we will never know. It starts out
small because people don't know what is going on or what the performance may be, but it slowly
grows to become a bigger audience as the curiosity of the situation gets the best of them.
As the idea of an audience appears and you begin to focus on that theme, it is not long before more
references to theatre begin to stand out. For instance, as the situation of Josef K and his confusion
with his arrest start to unfold, he takes the whole situation as a

George Stinney's Trial
Bang! Bang! Bang! The sound of the gavel striking the wooden desk rings throughout the
courtroom. The judge yells "order in the court!" and it becomes quiet all of the sudden. This occurs
very often during trials. Most people believe that all trials and cases are fair and always tell the truth
and that justice is served in the end. However, two cases that display the unfairness of trials are the
cases of George Stinney, Jr. and Casey Anthony. They show that however fair trials are believed to
be, some are not. The court case of George Stinney proves that not all trials are fair. The verdict of
George Stinney's trial was incorrect due to the lack of evidence against him. There was "no physical
evidence to connect him to the crime" he supposedly committed (Source 4). There were no
witnesses or bystanders to see who killed the girls. It was also discovered that the "beam with which
the two girls had been killed (by) weighed over twenty pounds" (Source 3). It was later decided that
George Stinney could not have swung the beam fast or hard enough to kill the ... Show more content
"(George Stinney) was interrogated by several police officers (all of whom were white) without any
legal counsel (there)"(Source 9). Then the police gave the court his confession. However "the
confession changed to fit the elements. The murder weapon changed. (First) it was a piece of iron,
then a spike and then a railroad spike. (The confession) changed in a manner beneficial to law
enforcement" (Source 8). This proves that the police were biased against George Stinney. Another
example of bias was when "Plowden (defense attorney) (said) there would be no appeal, as the
Stinney family had no money to pay for a continuation. However, Plowden never asked the family if
they had enough money, he just told the jurors that. That proves that the jury, defense attorney, and
police were all

Argumentative Essay: The Trial Of The Century
Henry Skouby
Ms. Davis
College Prep English
31 March 2017
The Trial of the Century. It was a warm day in California when it happened. Everyone was waking
up and preparing for a day of work, or in some kid's case a nice day to relax and enjoy the summer.
But that wasn't the case; instead, when people turned on their TV they were bombarded with news
of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman's death. The news of the murders spread quickly, soon everyone
across the country knew of what happened, and everyone was wondering "who would viciously kill
two innocent people?" Even in the Missouri, people were waking up to the news of the murders. "It
was like the crime was the only thing on the TV that day" said Chuck. Little did anyone know how
this story would end?
Everyone wondered who had done the horrible deed. It wasn't until the next day that there was a
break in the case and the country would be forever ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Chuck is right, this case shows that a man who has money can always be found innocent. Let's be
honest, if O.J would have been a normal guy, then he would have been locked away and had the key
thrown away. But because he had money, he was able to buy his way out of being convicted. Just
because O.J was found innocent doesn't mean he didn't lose nothing. The trial charges that O.J had
to pay to his lawyers were humongous. On top of the lawyer fees, O.J was found guilty in the civil
case. Since he was found guilty in the civil case meant he had to pay fines to both the Browns and
Goldman family, because in civil cases you only had to be somewhat thought to be guilty to be
charged (O.J Simpson Murder Trial Explained). "I don't really understand how O.J was found
innocent on the criminal case, but found guilty in the civil case. It doesn't make much sense." Chuck

The Scopes Trial: The Monkey Trial
"Everything in the Bible should be taken as it is given" Bryan. "The Scopes Trial" also known as
"the Monkey Trial" was a very controversial trial because of what was at stake and what Scopes was
on trial for. John Scopes was on trial for teaching Evolution in his 8th grade class. This trial was the
first trial ever to be broadcast on the radio because of how controversial it was. There was also a
book written in 1955 called Inherit The Wind which we will be comparing to the actual trial. This
book was a lot different from the actual trial on many points... I will describe these point and how
they differ. I will be using the literary elements Mood, how he story feels to the reader,
Symbolism/Impact, what the story symbolizes and how it impacted the world, and Setting, the
setting is where the story takes place. To begin this comparing I will use mood. The mood in Inherit
the Wind is very tense but there are joyous parts to the story. In the Actual Scopes Trial the mood
was very friendly and laid back. These two things differ greatly as tenseness is the absolute opposite
of friendliness. Also in the real trial the jury as actually only in the courtroom for a few hours of the
week long ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Inherit the wind changes the people in the story it makes them change from Church–going Bible
Toters to evolutionists. The spectators begins to mill about... a number of reporters clutter around
Drummond. (Lawrence & Lee, 1955). Before Drummond–Darrow in the real trial–Puts Brady–
Bryan in the real trial–On the witness stand to question him on the Bible and Brady admits that the
world could have possibly taken more than 6 days as stated in Genesis. This shows that words can
have a real impact on people when they are said by the right person. The exact opposite happened in
the real trial. No matter what was said, the people never budged form their Christianity. This shows
that Inherit the Wind is a fictional

Speech For The Jury Trial
"Gentlemen of the jury, thank you for listening so intently to this trial. I know you care about our
community, and that you will bring justice to the end of this sad story. My client, Mr. Baumer, is an
innocent man. People say that he poisoned Slade with wood alcohol, but this is not the case. Slade
refused to pay his bills and he bullied

The Trial By Franz Kafka
The Trial by Franz Kafka, an incomplete novel chalked full of questions and confusion – leading
readers to ask questions such as "why does the court function how it does?" and "what the heck is K.
being arrested for again?" Although Kafka predicates the novel on these two ideas, the court and
Josef K., never do readers explicitly gain a comprehensive or satisfactory understanding of the pair.
In light of the fact that The Trial is an incomplete novel, Kafka intentionally leaves the function of
the court and K.'s true character up for question. Kafka accomplishes this by never giving a true
name to either the court or Josef K., keeping the upper levels of the court a secret, and in Josef K.'s
transition from successful banker to complete obsession with the court. Luckily, Kafka offers a trail
of breadcrumbs that enables his readers to begin answering some of the questions presented in this
book. This essay illuminates these "breadcrumb" moments scattered throughout the novel to reveal
the true relationship between the court and its subjects. Furthermore, this essay asserts that the court
was in fact correct in its conviction of Josef K. as evidenced in the last chapter of this novel. In this
novel, Kafka writes about a court system unlike anything seen today. Although Kafka never gives an
explicit description of the court, readers can gain a firm understanding of how the court functions
via proper close reading and synthesis of the novels many parts. One of the first pieces

Essay On Jury Trials In Australia
History of Juries in SA:
Justice Evatt delivered a paper to the Australian Legal Convention which entitled "The Jury System
in Australia" in 1936 . Justice Evatt's thesis of Jury trials was that "in modern day society the jury
system is regarded as an essential feature of real democracy". Jury trials in the nineteenth century
were found way before in four colonies Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western
Australia . When Trial by Judge alone was first introduced in South Australian thirty eight were held
in the Supreme Court between 1989 and 1993, meaning all annual percentage of all criminal trials in
the court ranged between 3.9% and 8.9% . The Juries Act SA 1927 was amended many times
making some major changes. In 1966, women were introduced in the South Australian Jury system
as only men were capable of serving on Juries. An increase to the number of jurors available to
contribute in a criminal trial was amended in 2004 . It now states in the Juries Act 1927 under
section 6A that if court agrees there are good reasons to add additional jurors of 2 or 3 it can be
empanelled for a criminal trial .
Juries Act and its use ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It provides the certain power to the community to make a political decisions on being guilty or not
guilty while satisfying individuals with the decision .Jurors decisions on verdicts are more likely to
not be incorrect as there are 12 on the stand, whereas judge alone trials rely on one person on the
decision of the verdict . The Bureau of Criminal statistics also show that even judge alone trials
show higher acquittal rates than Jury trials in criminal cases . Another research conducted by the
Australian Institute of Criminology state the findings that empanelled jurors reported significantly
higher confidence when it comes to criminal trials than non– empanelled jurors

Kafka The Trial Essay
This thesis specially deals with the question "how does deconstruction make a space to let
"absurdism" come into the prison–house of text? In Franz Kafka the Trial (1925) Kafka's language
and techniques has reformulated the relationship between deconstruction and absurdism and
changed the manner in which they are related through his novel The Trial. According to Derrida,
literature stands on the edge of everything, almost beyond everything, including itself. (Derrida's,
Act of Literature, ed. by Derek Attridge (New York: Routledge, 1992), p.47. For deconstructive
thinkers such as Jacques Derrida, Gilles Deleuze, and Emmanuel Levinas, deconstruction can be
seen as the act of questioning and looking at limits and borders, but according to Spivak, who has
given a general explanation of deconstruction, the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This can be understood in the context of Jacques Derrida's concept of deconstruction and the idea of
"difference" in addition to the principles of absurdism which include double negation, lack of
reason, incongruity and lack of order. It is due to these concepts especially "deconstruction", which
means to "disassemble the parts of the whole" or to lose its construction" besides most of the themes
adopted by absurdism are presented through the trial: the absurdity of the world, the contingency of
events and the political oppression that helped in better understanding to Kafka's The Trial where
the udecidability of the text looms predominantly. According to Derrida's own words, the
undecidability "is not only an oscillation between contradictory rules which are very well
determined and both equally peremptory". This study will discuss how the language of
deconstruction opens the space for absurdism in Kafka's The Trial. In the opening chapter Joseph K.
is arrested and this arrest process took place not at physical standard but at mental standard. Mr. K.

When a person commits a crime, our modern government has a system in place in order for that
person to be punished in a way that can be fair and just. This type of government is usually run by
people who believe in a democratic system, where the decisions are made through a vote by the
people in order to make sure the decisions made are fair and just to an extent. In the book, The Trial
by Franz Kafka, the main character Josef K. is accused of committing a crime and put on trial by the
state. Throughout the book, Josef K. was never told the crime he committed or what charges are
being brought against him. This book was written in the 19th century, outside the United States, and
has yet to be finished by the author do to the sorry fact that he died before finishing the book. In the
following paragraphs I will use Fletchers, Basic Concepts of Criminal Law, to show that Josef K.'s
trial was conducted in a substantive manner. Every country has adapted its own code of law in
which the citizens use in order to provide the punishment to a crime committed in their area.
Although the United States is a unified country, each state consists of their own version of the penal
law code. Fletcher states, " One consequence of codification is that every country goes its own way.
Every country has adopted its own conception of punishable behavior, its own definitions of
offenses, its own principles for determining questions of self–defense, necessity, insanity,
negligence, and

The Scopes Trial
The Scopes trial happened mainly because the Butler Act was passed, the Butler Act made it illegal
to teach human Evolution in a public school. And even though the main objective of the scopes trial
was to attract business to the small town of Dayton, Tennessee it ultimately ended in science gaining
higher value in the American society over religion. The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)
gave an ad in the paper saying that it would financially help defend anyone who would teach
evolution in a public school thus breaking the law. And George Rappleyea an oposser of the butler
act went to see the town's school board's head school concerning this matter and they decided not
only would this help the small town of Dayton but also will either

A Jury's Trial
On Wednesday 7th of October, a conspiracy trial had commenced in courtroom ten of the Crown
Court. Upon entering, I expected a heavy air of anxiety in the air and intensity, but instead I was met
with a completely silent courtroom filled only with the sounds of barristers typing on their laptops.
Most the people were preoccupied waiting for the trial to start. In our line of vision were the
barristers dressed in wigs and black gowns over navy coloured suits and one casually dressed man
who seemed ready to record the trial. The judge seemed to be reading some papers before deciding
to announce the start of the trial.
The first stage of the trial began ten minutes into our seating inside. The judge began by arranging
the jury into their proper seats and informing them of how they will carry out their jury duty and the
process of it. The jury was compromised of twelve people, and each took their turn to swear their
oath to be truthful and fair in their judgement. The usher then proceeded to declare the full case to
the attendees as follows: ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They seemed to be split half male and half female, with the majority being white except for one man
who seemed to be Desi. The defendants were not present, but their names suggest they are also from
the middle class, or upper middle class. The barristers and judge, both white males, all gave the
impression of the upper class with their seemingly posh accents and their position in the court itself.
The only females in the courtroom other than the public jury were the usher and one of the clerks. It
would seem that the UK court system is not as inclusive of different ethnicities and genders as it
should be. What's more worrying is how everyone who is making a decision in the court is upper
class, and they could be protecting their own interests at the cost of giving defendants an incorrect
or biased

Trial By Jury Essay
A Jury plays a necessary part in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Trial by jury is
one of the ways that could be useful for reaching justice in the courts. The jury has 12 citizens who
are chosen randomly from different genders and different ages. (The Guardian, 2005) the jurors
work is to help the judge to a make decision about the case so the lawyers show them the evidence
and anything related to the case and then the jurors will try to make the right judgment whether the
criminal is guilty or not. People argue that they want the trial without the jury system because it is
not fair enough and there are other reasons such as the jurors do not have enough experience, jury
system is not fairest form of justice, they do not represent the society and jury ... Show more content
For instance, the juror could take bribe from the criminal to be in his or hers side. An example can
be mentioned here is the case of Vybz Kartel. According to AP NEWS (2013) there was a male juror
arrested because he tried to bribe the jury foreman to release Vybz Kartel (BBC NEWS 2014).
However, the chance of being corrupted for the jury is less than the judge. For example, it is
difficult to have 12 corrupted jurors as well as even the judge can be corrupted. According to BBC
NEWS (2013), the judge Akil Mochtar has been arrested regarding acceptance of taking a bribe of
£154,000.
Finally, there is an argument confirmed that, the jury system cost too much money. So to clarify this
argument Brian Kelly in the BBC NEWS mentioned that, the jury trial costs more than £8,000 per
day. Also Guy Hammond from the BBC NEWS said, "I realise that the court system is costing
taxpayers millions" so it is cost too much money (BBC NEWS ,2001). However, the argument
against this say that the high cost of the jury system is the price of the justice so it does not matter
how much it will cost (BBC NEWS,

The Casey Anthony Trial
Throughout one's life many are prone to being in one of America's many courtrooms at least once in
their life. Whether it is for a parking ticket, a petty larceny charge, or simply jury duty most citizens
have been in a courtroom once or twice. However, it is rare that one knows the many steps and
processes that take place when a crime has been convicted. There is an excess number of elements
that are introduced and just to name a few it all starts with the occurrence of the crime, then follows
the arrest, proceeded by an arraignment, bail hearing and any more steps before finally reaching the
final verdict that lands one with guilt or innocence (Neubrauer, Fadella 2013). Based on the laws in
place by the United States and the Constitution one must be able to prove guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt. If there is doubt at all in the jurors minds, they cannot convict the individual of being guilty
and lately this has created a lot of controversy in the United States with many cases being tried. For
example, the Casey Anthony case that took place in Florida was one of the most recent states where
Common Law and the Constitution were unable to be reconcilable to prove one's guilt.

In The Trial by Franz Kafka, the protagonist K. is going through what is often thought of as one of
the most dehumanizing aspects of society. Even in the United States many criticize the justice
system for being dehumanizing. People are forced to wear the same thing, act the same way, and are
given numbers instead of names. In The Trial Kafka emphasizes the dehumanizing aspects of this
process by exacerbating the bureaucratic steps that must be accomplished and adds more uncertainty
and secrecy to the steps. Kafka's writing shows the lack of information that K. is given, and the
symbolic dehumanization that occurs during the whipping and with K. lacking a last name. The
actual steps K. must take to clear him name is always kept secret. K. is always kept ignorant of his
charges, of what he must do, of what the outcome will be, or of what will happen next. As early as
page 3 K. is kept in the dark. When he originally asks what he is being charged with he is told "We
are not authorized to tell you that," (3), he is then promised that he will be "informed everything in
due course," (3). K. is kept in a total state of ignorance throughout the entire novel. He is constantly
introduced to new people who say that they can help him, but he is never given clear answers, he is
just shown false hope. At no point does he make any real progress in his case. He is always chasing
information, just to find out that he has been running in circles the whole time. The justice

Mock Trial Research Paper
After being a part of the mock trial, I think that the verdict was not the right one because even
though Leah and Jared harmed Ms. Cullen's reputation, they were not charged for it. Telling from
Scratchy, Mona, and Jock the teacher's evidence, I can support that Leah and Jared harmed Ms.
Cullen's reputation. They all think that her reputation was broken due to the blog that Leah and
Jared created on Facebook and what the kids from the school said about her. The trial was fair to
Leah and Jared because before the trial started, the judge gave all the members, which include Leah
and Jared, time to discuss and prepare for what they were going to say. Also, during the trial, when
the lawyers asked Leah and Jared about their feelings, they had to ask their questions differently.
Lastly, the consequences that Leah and Jared received were the right ones, even though I think that
they should have been guilty of harming Ms. Cullen's reputation. The trial was not fair to Ms.
Cullen because Leah and Jared were not accused of harming her reputation. However, before the
trial started, the judge gave all the members, including Ms. Cullen, time to think and prepare what to
say when the trial starts. Yet, the lawyers asked her fair questions that did not include her feelings,
so she received fair questionings. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
It had affected me on how important it is to think before I do something because I had to make an
honest judgment, with a complete sense of fairness. Leah, Jared, and Ms. Cullen's future depended
on it. If Leah and Jared weren't guilty for some charges that they were charged for, then it would
totally affect their life. The same thing goes for Ms. Cullen. If Leah and Jared didn't harm her future
hopes and use the internet to spread a false story, then she would have never had to go through the
problem that Leah and Jared

Trial Validity
Discussion
Overall what the study shows is that as the time between cue and target increases people's
performance tends to shift inversely. This is displayed as shorter instances (100ms) found
individuals responding faster, relative to when they were longer (500ms) to which individuals would
respond slower if they appeared on the same side, with only a minor increase when they appeared
on the opposite. Another interesting finding from the study was that trail validity had no statistically
significant effect on response times, essentially meaning that how likely a target was to appear had
no real effect on how well individuals performed in the study.
Trial Validity
As previously mentioned, one of the key findings from the current study was that ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Furthermore, seeing that the current study only variates the SOA 50ms below and 200ms from
previous research it would be interesting to see if the IOR continues to increase under circumstance
with higher SOA's. Another interesting insight of this study was the lack of trial validity effect,
which is either indicating that the processes used are a complex combination of the two or plausibly
that the measures used in this research weren't capable of seeing the difference. Future research
should aim to rectify this issue.
Overall this study provides some interesting insight into the field as it found that even in scenarios
were the cues offer no insight into the next location of the target, the same IOR effect can be seen.
This research found that trial validity appeared to have no effect on performance, implying that
individuals do not simply shift attention to or from but rather do a complex combination of the

Summary Of Mr. Shkreli's Trial
The current article of discussion asks its audience if we believe the treatment given by the courts are
fair regarding similar cases just with different defendants. Mr. Shkreli is known for acquiring the
rights of a generic drug used for rare disease and increasing the prices by 5,000% and soon became
the "most hated man in America". During his trial, many Jurors had asked to step down as they
could not provide the defendant with a fair and just hearing. Mr. Shkreli charges were on security
frauds on two hedge funds. He was found guilty on three counts and sentenced to 7 years even
though he paid all investors back plus interest.
Elizabeth Holmes, who founded the Silicon Valley Blood–Testing start–up Theranos, was accused
by the Securities

The Trials Of The Defeated Nazis
After World War II, the victorious Allies decided to hold a trial for the defeated Nazis. These trials
lasted from November 20, 1945 till October 1, 1946. Although the victors claimed that they would
give the accused a fair trial, upon closer inspection we can see that in reality, these trials were biased
and were a "victor's justice." After the war, each of the Allies leaders had their own idea for how
they should deal with the Nazi's. Stalin suggested that they should have trials, but here everyone is
guilty and afterwards is shot. What then would be the point of having a trial then? It would just
appear as a 'play' before they would perform their actual intentions. He may have suggested this also
so that he could say that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Although the Americans were applying "American justice" to the trials, they didn't even follow their
constitution while doing so. The US constitution states that laws cannot be made post–facto, but in
Nuremberg, they created these laws (for example, crimes against humanity, and waging aggressive
war) after the Germans had "committed" them. It is wrong however to charge defendants with
crimes that didn't exist in anyone's books at the time they were committed. Although some might
say that these crimes are "common knowledge," they may in fact be only common knowledge to
you. Not everyone in the world views things in the same way you might. John F. Kennedy even said
about the Nuremberg trials that "The Constitution was not a collection of loosely given political
promises subject to broad interpretation. It was not a list of pleasing platitudes to be set lightly aside
when expediency required it...[and] discard these Constitutional precepts in order to punish a
vanquished enemy. The Allies also said that they would keep away the "hand of vengeance" and
give a fair trial, but in reality they didn't follow this. Several rules were established for the
Nuremberg trials, but the Allies didn't even bother to follow some of these rules, or perform them
fairly. For example, rule 2 (Notice to Defendants and Right to Assistance of Counsel) said that
"Each individual defendant in custody shall receive not less than 30 days before a trial a copy,
translated into a

Speedy Trial
Chapter 15 is titled "Criminal Trials, Appeals, and Postconviction Remedies." A criminal case goes
to trial after the pretrial process and if the defendant has not pled guilty to the charges. The statute of
limitations establishes the time period in which prosecution must begin after the crime has been
committed. Certain felonies like murder generally have no statute of limitations, meaning that
defendants can be charged with the crime no matter how much time has passed after its commission.
The Sixth Amendment grants defendants the right to a speedy trial, to a public trial. The
Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment gives a defendant the right to confront hostile
witnesses at their trial, like through cross–examination of witnesses. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 established a uniform set of sentencing guidelines that led to a
determinate sentencing structure, where sentences for specific offenses are predetermined.
Minimum mandatory sentences for certain offenses have also been put in place. In determining what
an offender's sentence should be, investigators prepare a presentence investigation report.
Sentencing options range from probation, intermediate sanctions (like halfway houses),
incarceration in jail (for most misdemeanors), or prisons (for most

The Trial of Socrates
In the trial of Socrates, I juror number 307, Ryan Callahan vote the defendant is Not Guilty on the
first charge of Corrupting the youth. My justifications for this vote are as follows. Socrates didn 't
corrupt the youth, he just shared his ideas with them and they in turn chose the path to take these
ideas. Part of understanding this case is understand the time in which the case was held. This time
being 399 B.C., a time in which Athens was a free democratic city, a town which prided itself at the
time on the fact that its citizens had much freedom, particularly freedom of speech. Socrates
believed that only people who were educated should rule the people, which meant that people were
not capable of government participation ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
On top of all that when the arrogant Socrates went on trial he left the jury no choice but to find him
guilty so he played right into their hands. So to sum up the trial, the charges against him were
officially two, corrupting the youth and impiety. The two charges were, of course, linked, and, in the
relevant senses, he was, we must admit, guilty of at least one of them. For his effect on the lives of
the young men who followed him was indeed disrupting, and even corrupting, of the social order.
What his followers learned from him above all else, is to do two things. They learned to scrutinize,
and they learned to be skeptical. It was not that they mindlessly adopted a motto like "trust no one
over 30," or that they became, like many of today 's young people, contrary simply for the sake of
being contrary. Rather, they learned not to take on authority or on faith what others told them about
virtue, justice, or piety; they were seeking, as was Socrates himself, the truth of the matter and the
reasons for taking it to be the truth of the matter. And as we all know, the relentless pursuit of the
truth produces enemies. A Socrates may in the long run serve mankind, but in the short run he
aggravates virtually everyone around him.
Socrates was thus put to death for teaching others to scrutinize and be skeptical about what they are
told, and

The Case Information Of The Pre Trial Meetings And Trials...
On Monday, June 20, I was not given any direct assignments as Liz was out for the day and
Kathleen had finance meetings all day. That being said, I took the initiative to read over the case
information of the pre–trial meetings and trials scheduled for Tuesday. This week's pre–trial charges
include: retail theft, operating without insurance, operating without a license, operating while
suspended, improper turn, and failure to yield while emerging from an alley. After reading over the
police reports and case information, I decided to make use of CCAP to see if the defendants had any
more encounters with the law in other counties in Wisconsin. While some defendants did not have
any record outside of Manitowoc, others had no record in Manitowoc, but an extensive record in
other counties. This made me realize why it is so important that Liz makes use of CCAP before
meeting with the defendants, because if she only sees their records in Manitowoc, she might give
them a better offer for having a "clean record." Overall, looking through the reports and histories of
the defendants gives me an idea of how the defendants might behave and what kind of offers Liz
might give them in the pre–trial meetings. As for the trials scheduled for Tuesday, both defendants
have been charged of possession of THC. After looking through the case information, I actually
recognized the cases as they had been two of the cases that were canceled earlier in the summer due
to some conflict with the

Bryan's Trial: The Morality Of The Scopes Trial
The Scopes Trial was an eight day court case brought up around the issue of teaching evolution
within schools, and the morality of it, which ultimately led to the defendant, John Scopes, to be
pronounced guilty of teaching evolution within schools. Although it would seem that the Scopes
Trial was an issue of legality, it was chiefly a religious conflict between the old generation's way of
thinking, and the new generation's cultural rebellion. Because of the major focus on William
Jennings Bryan's knowledge of the bible, it would be best to observe and evaluate the seventh day
of the trial. As the day starts, Clarence Darrow, the defendant's lawyer, calls Bryan to the stand, and
asks of his "interpretation of the Bible," (144). This question provides further evidence of the
religious basis of the Scopes Trial, simply because the defendant's side realized that, in order to
protect the teaching of The Theory of Evolution, flaws within the bible's interpretation and
reasoning would have to be pointed out. This would weaken the argument of the plaintiff, and
possible help the jury realize that The Theory of Evolution was plausible. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This immediately tested the old generation's way of thinking, to see if it could stand up to the new
generation's way. Although the scientific theory of evolution would have it that animals evolved into
different types, instead of considering the theory, the old generation believed that God made all of
the creatures on Earth as they were for a reason. Bryan, being quite representative of the old
generation's way of thinking, confirmed that he believed

The Trial Of Tom Robinson
There were several legal issues present before and during this particular case that prevented any sort
of a fair trial from taking place. The largest legal issue that can be seen in the demise of Tom's true
innocence, sometimes blatantly, is that of perjury. The definition of perjuring oneself is "to make
false or misleading statements under oath", or basically lying when you have promised to tell the
truth. As I stated earlier, this lack of honesty can truly break down the integrity of the justice system,
because it is built on gaining facts and building an accurate picture of the case currently being tried.
If everyone were to lie and tell their own story about what had taken place, we would never be able
to put the puzzle together and allow the jury to fairly judge the defendant. And albeit the trial of
Tom Robinson was never to be tried in a just and unquestionable manner, the further lies made by
those that testified made it even harder for Atticus to prove innocence. This particular claim is
focused almost specifically on Mayella's story, and the several cracks and gaps that can be found
within it. She has to convince herself before she can claim that her father had never hurt her
previously. She also begins to forget pieces of the fabrication, as she cannot remember if she was
beaten during the rape, or how that a man with only one working arm could've taken advantage of
her at all. At the end of her testimony, where she simply stops asking questions, makes a demand

The Trial And The Metamorphosis
Joanna Martinez
Ms. Tobenkin
AP Literature, Period 4
22 May 2016
Senior Project Essay
The Trial and The Metamorphosis are the two foremost works Franz Kafka has ever written. By
doing this, Franz makes the similarities and differences very obvious, yet each text is complex in
their own way. In The Trial and The Metamorphosis, Kafka uses unique aspects to compare the
characters in each novel. Each character is being forced by anonymous forces. They both go through
loneliness to find the meaning behind their suffering. Each similarity and difference in The Trial and
The Metamorphosis, come along with complexity that gives readers a deeper psychological view. In
having these similarities and differences, it can be arguable that the characters had inevitable deaths.
At the end, their death may or may not have been preventable which shows their struggle in each
story.
In both, The Trial and The Metamorphosis, the characters never find out who the anonymous forces
are. This is one of the dominant issues of both stories which concludes to be one of the similarities.
One of the examples would be from The Trial, in this scene of The Trial, Joseph K is leaving the
bank and as he is passing by a lumber room, he realizes that some of the warders are getting beaten.
He asked for the man beating them to stop but the man did not listen and continued to beat them.
The difference between these stories is that they handle their situation in a very different ways. In
The Metamorphosis,

Inequality In The Trial
The absence of authority and hierarchy in the society is what anarchists strive for; their aim is to
create a community built with accordance to three underlying principles, including equality: "a
society based on ... liberty, equality and solidarity" (Anarchist FAQ 16). However, how can equality
be achieved? In Kafka's "The Trial", the apparent inequality between the Man and the Authority, and
more specifically, the Court, is evident and leading to the tragic consequences. Moreover, the motif
of the relationship between the law itself and the man is addressed in one of the central elements of
the story, the parable "Before the Law".
"Before the Law" can be interpreted as the allegory of the fate of Joseph K., the main character of
the novel, who is fruitlessly trying to get ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Only the man himself could decide that he can pass if he truly realized that he is equal to the
doorkeeper, and all the doorkeepers above him. He did not have to ask for permission to enter,
choosing to defy the seeming authority of the described hierarchical system. This idea correlates to
the words of Rancière: "politics only occurs with these mechanisms are stopped in their tracks by
the effect of presupposition ... of the equality or anyone and everyone" (17). Unfortunately, the man
chose his own fate, allowing himself only to peek through the door and never building up the
courage to actually assume himself equal to the doorkeeper.
"Before the Law" is one of the most important elements of the novel, forecasting the end of K.'s
story – he is doomed to die with no knowledge of what he was guilty of. Joseph does not stand the
trial and faces his death with little resistance, although he was free to go wherever he wanted;
instead, he waited for the chance prove himself innocent before the court, and, like the man from the
country, is never granted the admittance to the

The Guilty: The Trial Of Adnan Syed
On the podcast serial we heard about the trial of Adnan Syed. After listening to the podcast voiced
by Sarah Koenig, a lot of people wondered if Adnan actually had a fair trial, it interested people and
left a cliffhanger which made this podcast so real and made people stay engaged. It changed the case
for adnan by giving him a chance at a new trial but the real question is was his first trial any good
and was it fair?
Well what does a fair trial refer to? To insure that a person will have a fair trial without the
government and protectors abusing their power. "Also known as separating the innocent from the
guilty and protecting against injustice" ( fair trials international). The person should be informed on
why they are being arrested and any charges they may be facing. The persons under arrest should be
given a lawyer within 48 of the arrest (1). They should be allowed a separate court based on their
race, color, sex, language, religion, etc so there is no bias (1). ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Jay had admitted to the crime they did and to be accessory of murder and an accomplice. Why
would Jay openly admit to something that could end him up in jail, of course the jury and police
would believe jay but there was some lies or mix ups in jays allegations more than once. Jay had
claimed that Adnan and him had a buried the body around 7 then later he says they did it around
midnight. And where he had seen the body. In the podcast,serial, there was close to 300 references
to Adnan's ethnicity were made

Case Analysis : The Mock Trial
For the mock trial I was assigned to be one of the prosecuting attorneys. After being presented with
case materials which included facts of the case, statements from both prosecuting and defense
witnesses, penal code for the alleged charges, and map of the crime scene, we as a group decided to
create one Google Drive document. There we would upload our parts of the case and help other
group members with their assignments. In the first day prosecuting attorneys were assigned
witnesses for direct and cross examination. I was responsible for preparing direct questions to the
police officer who was first to arrive at the crime scene. Based on his statement I came up with
multiple questions which allowed to determine the events and condition of the victim on that date.
While preparing both direct questions and cross examination questions I watched videos of actual
court hearings where attorneys questioned witnesses. This approach helped a lot. After coming up
with direct questions, which for me the process was interesting and intriguing, I asked my group
members to review them and give their feedback. Questions for cross examination gave me most
trouble. I found it complicated to come up with sufficient and proper questions in order to question
the witness and find the best possible way of subjecting his statement. Videos, both presented in
class and ones I found myself did not resonate well with me. Despite that, I uploaded my cross–
examiantion questions and asked for the

God On Trial Sparknotes
God on Trial God on Trial is about a group of Jews who were captured by Nazis, and sent to
Auschwitz. Auschwitz was a concentration camp ran by Nazis, and is the place where most Jews
went to die. This movie took place in one of the bunkers in Auschwitz, where a group of men
decided to put God on Trial. They decided who would be the defendant, prosecutor, and judge, with
everyone else being witnesses. They had a heated discussion, and came up with a guilty verdict,
before some of them were sent off to the gas chambers. The prosecutor's statement about god killing
innocent people for the benefit of others is what may have been the deciding factor in the verdict.
During God on Trial, both the defendant and prosecutor came up with good

Mock Trial Self Reflection
Mock Trial Self–reflection I have done mock trials and mock hearings in my other courses, but the
mock trial in advocacy was more extensive. In my previous courses, I had learned how to fill out
forms and the basic steps in a trial but did not have the chance to be involved in the entire process
from beginning to end. In my self–reflection, I will discuss what I think my group did correct, and
what I think needs to be improved on for when I go out into the working field. My group was
working on the defence. We read the plaintiff's claim and the defendant's claim until we fully
understood the case. This allowed us to pinpoint what the legal issues were, what our client wanted,
and what her defence would be. In our case, we knew there was a contract dispute regarding car
repairs and that our client's defence was that she did not consent to any repairs. We also knew that
our client was also claiming damages for her broken mechanical mouse. Once we had pinpointed
the exact basis of our argument, we each conducted our own legal research. Mainly we looked ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
During the direct examination of our client, who I played, our main objective was for me to tell as
much of my side of the story as possible. It was sometimes difficult, making sure I said everything I
needed to say, as I could only be asked about things I had already brought up. This experience has
taught me the importance of talking to clients about going on the stand, and what is expected of
them. Overall, although my group was not successful, I believe we did an adequate job at showing
to the court the emotional turmoil our client was under. Although we did not prepare for the
plaintiff's cross–examination questions, I think we had handled them well. We were able to clarify
most things through direct, and therefore put context to the questions we were then asked in the

A Fair Trial Research Paper
John Garamendi once said, "Anyone can be falsely accused of a crime. Everyone accused of a crime
deserves a fair trial." An 18 year old boy has been accused of murdering his father. He is on trial for
a death penalty and all the evidence points to the fact that he is guilty. The evidence is actually not
as accurate as it sounds. The 18 year old defendant is not guilty because the witnesses' information
was not accurate, there were many copies of the murder weapon that had been titled "one–of–a–
kind", and the defendant was very shaken up when being questioned. Although the information
sounds correct, it isn't accurate at all. The neighbor stated that he heard screaming and a body hit the
floor while he was sitting in bed. After getting up

Clinical Trials
These events are just a few examples of the ways that medical companies might take advantage of
people in developing countries in order to further their research more quickly and increase their
profit. An ever increasing number of trials are being held overseas; in 2008, nearly 65 percent of
trials on products registered from within the United Sates were conducted in other countries. With
this growth, the need to make sure that vulnerable communities are not exploited also increases;
while the FDA did inspect roughly two percent of domestic trials, the number of overseas trials
which were inspected was less than half that number. (Wechsler, 2011) These are worrisome
examples and statistics which all need to be addressed as the medical community ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
A group of researchers sought to get a closer look at how clinical trials were carried out by talking
to nurses who were working with drug trials. While participants in this study were all located in the
United States, their experiences are pertinent when considering the ethical concerns involved in all
clinical trials. The nurses who participated voiced a variety of concerns while they were working
with clinical trials. They reported that despite consent being voluntary, and patients being told that
they could discontinue a study at any time, there were some conflicts between this and the actual
practice. Nurses who lost subjects in the study were often penalized and reprimanded, seemingly
encouraged to sacrifice the patient's rights and desires in order to keep them in the trial. They also
talked about how higher ups, who might be in charge of funding or the legalities, are often out of
touch with what is actually ideal in the practical sense, rather than the bottom line. One nurse gave
the example of how legally, one official might want the consent form to be three pages long, another
might want it cut down considerably, and the nurse, who is actually performing the study, wants a
consent form which is both thorough as to protect the patient, but concise and clear enough to be
easily understood by the patient. Furthermore, nurses might be asked about their own opinions by
their patients, which leaves them in a difficult situation where they could be using their authority to
pressure someone into a study. All of these are difficult things to balance, and very valid concerns
brought forward by individals with hands on knowledge of these trials. (DeBruin, Fisher &
Liaschenko,

Criminal Trial Stages
List and define the stages of a criminal trial.
1. Arrested: The first step is a person may be arrested if the police have probable cause that he or she
did the crime. Meaning probable cause is reasonable suspicion that someone has committed a crime.
Moreover, police have a reason to suspect them, because someone saw them commit the crime,
there is evidence available, and someone's testimony.
2. Accused sent to jail or released on bail: If a person is arrested and he does not pay bail, he will
have to go to jail or prison until his trial. This can last anywhere up to one week, to a month
depending on the court's docket. If a person pays out bail they give the court the money, and when
they show up for court they give that money back.

The Trials Of The Nuremberg Trials

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Victoria Leon

More from Victoria Leon (14)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The Trials Of The Nuremberg Trials