In the case of Peter v. North Carolina, we the jury find Michael Peterson not guilty of first degree murder of his wife Katherine Peterson. The information that was presented in this case does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Michael was motivated by an act of malice when he had decided to take away the life of a loved one. Because of this occurence, Michael is currently facing another trial in order to see if he is guilty for a crime he did not commit. As a jury, we cannot condone the act of putting an innocent bystander in a position to be imprisoned if he is not condemned of the charges that is handed down from court. Convicting Michael as a murderer in this case would take away the freedom that he deserves and distort the peaceful atmosphere that surrounds his family.
Keeping this in mind, we need to come to an understanding that being in a jury carries a lot of weight because a decision we make will bring forth life changing consequences. The prosecutors in this case believe that Katherine was beaten by Michael in an act of malice. In an effort to support their case, they have presented evidence that
…show more content…
In reviewing this case, we believe that the defense is more valid than the prosecutors in this case. The evidence that was presented from the defense in this case carries a significant amount of weight that helped to draw us to the conclusion that Michael is innocent and that the event was just an unfortunate accident. As a jury, we reviewed the defenses owl theory, their take on the peterson’s financial situation, and their explanation of a possible burglary occurring in the home during the time of the incident. We found the evidence to be very compelling, effective, and notable in its defense of Michael Peterson. Going forward, we will try to use the information obtained to prove his innocence in the court of
On June 12, 1994, the bodies of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were found dead at her home in Brentwood, CA. Orenthal James Simpson, or O.J. Simpson was notified of their deaths and immediately taken into custody for questions. Upon the collection of various pieces of evidence from the crime scene, all avenues pointed to Simpson as the culprit for the double murder. The conclusion of Simpson criminal trial resulted in his acquittal. There were various reasons for this acquittal. The most prominent reasons include accusations of racism, evidence contamination, and the lack of faith in DNA profiling. This paper will discuss the issues that arose with the trial in depth and offer an explanation and solution to resolving issues
Jones v. North Carolina Prisoners’ Union Court cases over time have come forth and altered the course of this country and even the world. While this case didn’t really affect the world, Jones v. North Carolina brought forth an important question on prisoner’s rights. Jones v. North Carolina was a court case in 1977 that brought forth the debate if workers in prisons have the right to join a labor union. The details of the court case and thoughts on if the court was justified in their ruling will bring to light of what sort of value as a human being do prisoners have.
In the case of the State of North Carolina v. Lester Gerard Packingham, the question of whether a state can restrict sex offender’s from being on social media sites without restricting their constitutional rights is played out. Lester Packingham is a registered sex offender who was caught having a Facebook website profile even though it is against North Carolina state law. This paper will explore the constitutionality of N.C. Gen Stat. § 14–202.5 (2011) and will analyze the legal opinions of this case from both the Court of Appeals of North Carolina and Supreme Court of North Carolina and make an educated decision on whether the Supreme Court of North Carolina’s decision should be upheld or reversed.
North Carolina, the concurrence states, “If the statue is genuinely ambiguous, such that overturning the officer’s judgement requires hard interpretive work, then the officer has made a reasonable mistake.” Based on this statement, it gives us support to consider whether Officer Raymond’s stop was objectively reasonable or not. Also, The Fourth Amendment protects the “right of people to be secure in their persons houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be secured, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Jones, “the Government’s installation of a GPS device on a target’s vehicle, and its use of that device to monitor the vehicle’s movements, constitutes a ‘search.’” They stressed the importance of fact that the Government had “physically occupied private property for the purpose of obtaining information.” Under these circumstances, it was not necessary to inquire about the defendant’s expectation of privacy in his vehicle’s movements in order to determine if a Fourth Amendment search had occurred. They continued to reaffirmed this principle in Florida v. Jardines, where they held that having a drug-sniffing dog nose around a suspect’s front porch was a search, because police physically entered the enclosure of the home and gathered information without being permitted by the
Our group chose to do the highly debatable case regarding George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin. Based on the various parts from group members, it would seem we have both sides of the case so there will be discussion from either point of view. Our paper is not going to sway the reader in either direction, but simply state the facts for each side and give an overview of the case from our perspective.
The case of Dwayne Providence is not only a heart-retching but an insightful yet horrendous case which illustrations and elaborated on how an individual can easily be wrongfully convicted. This case was set in motion once Dwayne was arrested in Detroit Michigan, in the year of 2000. The beginning of the case goes into sumptuous detail about how he was getting his life together before he got arrested. The issue about the entire case started with Dwayne thinking that he was pulled over for a traffic violation. He was denied the ability to obtain knowing about the situation, and once he questioned the police he was not given an answer. It was later, that he had found out that he was going to be questioned for homicide. Dwayne told the officer
The case of Terry V. Ohio is a landmark United State Supreme Court case that was decided in 1968 (“Terry v. Ohio”, n.d.). The plaintiff in this case was a man named John Terry and the state of Ohio was the Respondent. This decision from case influenced law enforcement's ability to detain citizens in order to question them about a possible crime. Because of this decision, the men and women of law enforcement are able to briefly detain citizens in order to further developing investigating information that could determine if a crime was committed or not.
The O. J. Simpson double murder case, also titled “People of the State of California v. Orenthal James Simpson was a trial in which James O.J Simpson, a former National Football League player was convicted at the Los Angeles County Superior Court of two murder offenses on June 12, 1994. He was accused of killing his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman, a restaurant waiter at Mezzaluna. The trial spans for a period of eight months. The opening statements were read on January 23, 1995, whereas the verdict, which left Simpson a free man, was declared on October 3, 1995. “The Trial of The Century,” as it is commonly known, has been described as the most publicized trial in history. However, before Simpson could be arrested and prosecuted, they had to go through an investigation process with the implementation of some techniques used by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) as this essay illustrates.
In the Edwards v. South Carolina case a group of african-american protesters organised a peaceful march to the South Carolina State House and were confronted by a group of police who arrested the protesters for “breach of the peace” after they refused to disperse, and sang patriotic songs. The supreme court decided in favor of the protesters and said that the arrests violated the protesters First and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
For this assignment I got the opportunity to witness the Florida Supreme Court case Thomas Theo Brown V. State of Florida presided over by Chief Justice Jorge Labarga and a panel of other justices. This case was regarding the appeal of Thomas Theo Brown, a Wendy’s employee who was convicted for fatally shooting his co-worker, Ms. Juanese Miller, back in 2009. He had been sentenced to death following the guilty verdict of first degree murder. Mr. Brown filed a challenge to his conviction, wherein he stated a claim that he should be resentenced due to a lack of objection by his original counsel regarding a claim made by the prosecution. The claim not objected to was that the defendant, Mr. Brown, had premeditated the murder in spite of the fact that he had actually admitted to second degree murder.
1. Ladies and gentleman of the jury. First, I like to thank you for your attention and service. Now, I like to direct your attention to what this case is all about, and that is pain. Pain inflicted on two separate individual. It was that defendants financial pain, that cause Ms. Fitzgerald physical pain, mental pain, and emotional pain.
The McCullough Vs. Maryland case’s significance was that it was the first to question the power of the federal government. It began when the war of 1812 had ended and the U.S. had acquired a lot of debt. Congress founded the 2nd bank of the United States of America to help pull the country out of debt. At first, the people were happy with Congress’ decision because the bank was a great success, but as the states sensed a financial crisis, known as the Financial Crisis of 1819, they began to dislike the bank. The states were angered by the fact that they had less power than the federal government and decided to rebel and fight back.
FACTS: Two men Brady and Boblit were were found guilty of murder in the first degree. The two men were sentenced to death. Both of the men received separate trials. After the trial Brady confessed to planning and commission of the crime, but denied personally committing the murder. Brady’s attorney had requested access to the police statement, but one statement was not present to the court. The statement of Boblit, that he confessed, personally committing the murder himself. The defense requested an appeal and the court of Maryland agreed, and the trial of withholding of evidence proceeded, the court ruled that this was a violation of due process, and remanded the case, and new proceedings commenced.
This essay is purposed for the evaluation of the provocative case, The State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, more commonly referred to as O.J. Simpson. On the 12th of June, 1994 the homicide of Nicole Simpson, O.J. Simpson’s ex-wife, occurred at her home. Reports of a body sprawled out the front of Nicole Simpson’s house were made through a 911 call. On arrival, police made the discovery of Nicole Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman’s dead bodies outside the house. The review of this investigation will be achieved through; Assessment of the key aspects of the process of investigation. Evaluation of the main investigative flaws made throughout the investigation. Identifying strategies to prevent these flaws from happening in