1991 Sacramento Hostage Crisis

In the case of Wong Sun v United States, in consideration of the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine the Court excluded the admission of evidence in the trial court due to the violation of defendant’s Fourth Amendment Rights when the derivative evidence was obtained. Therefore, in this essay, I am going to discuss if the exclusion of evidence contributes in an important way of supporting the guarantees of the Fourth Amendment or should the derivative evidence be admitted because police officers could not have anticipated the discovery of derivative evidence.

There was once time of prosperity and hope in this great nation. A time where it seemed that nothing could go wrong and a time that America seemed to be on top of the world as a powerhouse; however, by the late 1970’s, that time was no more. America went from an economic powerhouse to a country struggling to survive. America went from the land of the free and the home of the brave to citizens having no identity of patriotism following the Vietnam War. America went from doing the attacking and righting the wrong in the world, to being harassed and taken advantage of. This harassment is told through David Farber’s novel, Taken Hostage, which details the hostage takeover that involved sixty-six American citizens who had to endure 444 agonizing days of being taken hostage because America was no longer in control. During the time of the Iranian hostage crisis, Americans were held back by the tragedy for numerous reasons, many of which stem from the immediate reaction of combined shock and frustration towards the United States Government and President Carter, a lack of knowledge of the ongoing strained relationship between the two countries, and finally, the surprising tension and ineffectiveness of the Carter Administration’s foreign policy.

The right to a speedy trial is considered an essential part of the due process applicable against the states because of the decision in the case of Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967) and ultimately the inclusion of it within the fourteenth amendment, that was granted by the doctrine of selective incorporation. In this particular case, the defendant Klopfer appealed to the supreme court because his trial had been postponed to be brought up again in the future when desired. Klopfer claimed that the right to a speedy trial, granted by the Sixth Amendment, should be pertinent to a state’s criminal prosecution due to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Ingram, 2009). The case was examined by the supreme court who ruled that the right to a speedy trial is a crucial basic right, just as the other rights guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, that has been around for a very long time (Steinberg, 1975).

This case is one that changed the way the United States Police forces will work forever. Every human in the world has natural born rights. Even people who have been arrested have rights, ‘The rights of the accused’. These rights are the main point of this court case.

The entire interrogation, from the start was carried out unlawfully. Brenton Butler who was fifteen- years old at the time, was brought in without a parent or attorney in the room. In fact, his parents were

August 9th 2014, Ferguson Missouri, an unarmed black teen Michael Brown was shot, and fatally wounded by a white police officer by the name of Darren Wilson. As a direct result of deciding not to indict Officer Wilson, the black community was out raged! Riots, looting, and damage to businesses soon followed the judge’s ruling. The trial was unlike normal trials which were treated with more expedience in the process, the grand jury in Officer Wilson case met for three months and 25 days. (Buchanan, et. al. 2014)

The case comes down to this fundamental question: What is the role of the police in protecting the rights of the accused, as guaranteed by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution? The Supreme Court of the United States had made previous attempts to deal with these issues. The Court had already ruled that the Fifth Amendment protected individuals from being forced to confess. They had also held that persons accused of serious crimes have a fundamental right to an attorney, even if they cannot afford one. (Supreme Court)

In an 8-to-1 decision, the Court held that the search undertaken by the officer was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and that the weapons seized could be introduced into evidence against Terry. The Court found that the officer acted on more than an “hunch” and that “a reasonably prudent

This case mainly deals with the interpretation of our Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, which protects us from unlawful search and seizures. What we can learn from this case are: the differences in court systems, the elements that comprise the Fourth Amendment, and the controversies surrounding it. The text relevant to this case can be found within the first six chapters of our textbook, with an emphasis on Chapter 6 “Criminal Law and Business”.

Annually hundreds of wrongfully convicted bystanders are let out of prison, some having served decades for crimes they didn’t commit. On January 13th, 1999, Hae Min Lee of Woodlawn high school was murdered and her body later found in linkin park. The person convicted? Adnan Syed, an ex-boyfriend. With, the majority of the evidence easily disproven by cell tower records, an alibi not ever addressed, and jurors who openly admit his culture was a factor, Adnan Syed deserves the right to a new and fair trial.

In the case of Fare v. Michael C., the police arrested the sixteen-year-old Michael C. under the suspicion of murder, and he was transported to the police station for a custodial interrogation (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). Furthermore, before the interrogation began Michael C. was advised of his Miranda Rights, and Michael C. specifically asked to consult his probation officer, and not a lawyer (Elrod & Ryder, 2014). Consequently, the police refused to allow Michael C. to speak with his state probation officer, and they continued to question him about the murder (Henry-Mays, 2007). Michael C. continued to answer the investigator’s questions and he drew sketches, which ultimately implicated him in the murder (Henry-Mays, 2007). Now that we understand the general facts of the case, let us examine the key facts and issues, which lead to the Supreme Court’s decision.

November 4, 1979, seizure of the United States embassy in Tehran and the hostage of four hundred and forty-four days following, were the first steps leading up to the perpetual War on Terror. In the book Taken Hostage by David Farber informs about the Iran Hostage Crisis and the First Encounter with Radical Islam. United States and Iran got into conflict, leading to the Iranians holding American Embassy members hostage as revenge for them feeling betrayed by the United States. It also informs us about other events that occurred in a decade that caused the United States many problems. Farber believes the failure of American policymakers and more specifically from President Carter, to identify the severity of the crisis made for the prolonged crisis. The sheer ineptitude of the Carter administration was the cost of the US to lose it’s way economically, culturally, politically and even military. Carter struggled to respond to the impulses of Islamic fundamentalism within the prevailing Cold War paradigm. They saw the real problem as against modernism and they knew that the US was the major force spreading this belief throughout the world. The media misrepresentations of the struggle and mass media manipulation of Americans played on the peoples emotions. Although Carter was popular at the beginning of his presidency, this began to change when he was unable to solve economic problems and was unsuccessful in negotiating the release of the American hostages in Iran.

In my paper to follow I intend to better educate and provide examples and different situations dealing with the Fourth Amendment in criminal procedures.

The United States history during 1977 to 1989 went through two presidencies and whirlwind of events happened. When President Jimmy Carter became president he wanted to lower the inflation rates to make life easier for the people of the United States. While that was his goal it got completely derailed. Near the end of Jimmy Carters presidency, a group of Iranian students took over the U.S Embassy in Tehran and took people hostage. Over the course of the 444 days the hostages where held captive while the people of the United States voted for a new president to help lead them into a new direction. The people voted for Ronald Reagan. While he was president things didn’t go as he planned as well. The issues with Iran did not calm down and escalated to something bigger. After the Iran hostage crisis, the US had another issues with Iran and it was the Iran- Contra affair. During this essay I will be talking about the book called “Taken Hostage” by David Farber and the information in the book. The book is about the time frame of Jimmy Carter’s presidency and the issues with Iran and the hostage crisis. The second half of my essay is towards President Ronald Reagan’s and the issues about the Iran- Contra affair and the lasting issues between Iran and the United states.

It is the right of every citizen in this nation to have his or her case decided by a fair and impartial jury. The selection of the jury panel is one of great importance and one that can have a great effect on the outcome of the case. Therefore, it is obvious that the attorneys have a