A Brief Summary Of The Cotton Case

The Massachusetts Bay Colony Case Against Anne Hutchinson is a transcription of a court trial. The document was written in 1637 by an unnamed person, who worked for the court. It was written to keep a record of the trial and to set a precedent for future trials. Anne Hutchinson was on trial for holding and practicing beliefs that were considered threatening to the stability of the church and community. Anne Hutchinson was convicted of antinomianism and was subsequently excommunicated from the colony. After leaving Massachusetts Bay, Anne went on to help found Portsmouth, Rhode Island. After Portsmouth, Anne Hutchinson went to Long Island where she was killed.

When it comes to critiquing how the identification information was obtained, several things are considered unreliable. The first mistake of the use of eyewitness testimonies in the Thompson & Cotton case was Jennifer was in a state of shock when identifying her assailant. Jennifer was in a deep slumber as a stranger at knifepoint awakened her causing adrenaline rush and high stress as she was fearing for her life. “My body was terrified although my mind hadn’t caught up yet” (Cannino et al. 12). This type of state of mind causes the brain to cloud its judgment when high stress occurs during the process of identifying a criminal. Although, Jennifer was able to study her attacker to the best ability possible, stress can alter the memory process clouding exact description especially held at knifepoint.

In Canada, the leading cause of wrongful conviction is due to the factor of eyewitness account. It has been proven that individual’s minds are not like tape recorders because everyone cannot precisely and accurately remember the description of what another person or object looks like. The courts looks at eyewitness accounts as a great factor to nab perpetrators because they believe that the witness should know what they are taking about and seen what occurred on the crime scene. On the other hand, eyewitness accounts lead to a 70 percent chance of wrongful conviction, where witnesses would substantially change their description of a perpetrator.

The case of Mills v. Rogers has a significant importance in virtue of the human, civil and constitutional rights of the patients who are hospitalized at mental institutions. Despite the fact whether the patient was there voluntarily or contrary, Rogers believed that the institutions should respect the patient’s decision when it involved antipsychotic drug treatments. Rubie Rogers was a 36-year old black woman who voluntarily institutionalized herself at the Boston State Hospital (BSH). Rogers suffered from hallucinations along with delusions and acquired a history of thought disorder such as violent behavior. Before Mills v. Rogers, a prior lawsuit was filed.

One of the most significant court cases in the 1800s was the Dred Scott v. Sanford case in 1857 (Kelly, 2014). This case gripped the nation right as the North and the South became further and further apart. The Scott v. Sanford case deepened the boundary closer to Civil War. Scott v. Sanford drew in everyone’s attention and led to the rally of a lifetime. The case created problems and changes in the United States and the significance of this case is still awed by today.

The Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States of America. With this title they have the final say about the decisions for the country. However the Supreme Court can make mistakes and have so before. The case considered the worst Supreme Court decision among many scholars is the Dred Scott V. Sanford case from the pre-civil war era. In which time slavery was a very hot topic between the states. In this case it was determined that a slave was not only not a citizen of the United States but also property (our documents). This court ruling made useless of the Missouri compromise of 1850 which made states above the 36°30’ line Free states and all below the line slaves states (History). This decision was eventually overturned by the Civil War amendments the 13th and 14th which stated that slavery is illegal in all states not only ones in rebellion and that all people born in the united states are citizens including people of color (our documents).

Shortly after the establishment of the Kansas Nebraska Act, there was a slight moment of opportunity for the nation to end the long-lasting controversial issue of slavery once and for all, the Dred Scott v. Sandford case, but again, the division of the two regions grew fonder. In the 1830s, Dred Scott, a Missouri slave accompanied his slave owners to several different territories, including Wisconsin and Illinois, two slave free states at the time. After Dred Scott’s slave owner died, he attempted to sue for his freedom, being it he had stepped on “free man” soil. Although he had to return back to Missouri, the second he walked onto a free state territory he no longer identified himself as a slave. However, the ruling in the end only strengthened

“Wrongful convictions happen every week in every state in this country. And they happen for all the same reasons. Sloppy police work. Eyewitness identification is the most- is the worst type almost. Because it is wrong about half the time. Think about that.” (Grisham). Wrongful convictions can happen to anyone, at anytime. Grisham implies wrongful convictions happen for the same reasons, careless police work as well as eyewitness identification. An eyewitness identification is a crucial aspect in detective work because it essentially locates the person at the crime scene. This is the worst cause of wrongful convictions because it is wrong half the time.

The Scottsboro Boys were nine African American teenagers accused of raping two White American women on a train in Alabama in 1931. These were landmark legal cases due to this incident dealing with racism and the right to a fair trial. The cases included a lynch mob before suspects had even been indicted, all-white juries, rushed trials, and hostile disruptive mobs. It is often regarded as a grave example of a miscarriage of justice in the U.S. legal system.

On patrol serving as a special constable I was called to a male that was feeling suicidal and saying he was going to kill himself. On arrival I was met by a young male who I could see was clearly and obviously distressed and emotionally upset. He said he was troubled and confused and had an urge to kill himself. It was clearly necessary for me to intervene in the situation to keep him safe and ascertain if he had done anything to himself prior to arrival, e.g. legal overdose or taken drugs.

Dred Scott, an enslaved African American from Virginia, worked most of his life on a cotton plantation in Alabama owned by Army surgeon, Dr. John Emerson. Scott went along with his owners to Illinois and later out to the Wisconsin Territory, where the act of slavery was illegal. Later on, the family moved back to Missouri where the doctor eventually died. After this experience, Dred Scott, with the help of antislavery lawyers and his old owners, filed for his freedom. Scott felt that he was a free man due to him once living in a free area for four years. Years passed until one fateful day when Scott’s case reached the Supreme Court.

I am writing in support of the incrimination of my fellow classmate. On the afternoon of March 30th at 3:40 I was walking from Mr. Daron Atkins room, room 26 to my car that was parked between the new wing and cafeteria. I was in quite a hurry because I was late to The Shepherd's House but you can never pass up an opportunity to take a Snapchat in the fabulous 1st wing hallway lighting. It wasn't until later the next day when I was questioned by the officer that found the corpse that I thought to examine this very tasteful Snapchat. Upon further examination I noticed a figure dressed in all black standing at Ms. Martin’s door. At first glance, this body seemed completely disguised in all black, but this person just happened to be carrying a

Cotton's wife, Robbin, was "furious" when she learned that Thompson-Cannino wanted to meet them. The couple argued about it for a week before Ronald finally told his wife that he was going to meet Jennifer with or without her. When you read the account of their first meeting, it seems that it was more difficult for Robbin to forgive Jennifer than it was for

Dear, Victim of the Stanford incident, I am writing you to let you know you are not alone. If nobody believes or hear you out let me say I do. It is truly wrong that the system is set up the way it is. If nobody saw fault in the situation just know that I did. Regardless of you being unconscious and not remembering does not give the suspect a chance to keep changing stories.

He got it close to me, I got scared, I yelled very hard. They ran when I yelled. I got scared when I saw the gun. I yelled with fear. When I yelled, the 3 of them ran. They were brown skinned. I had seen them before when they passed by. One of them lived nearby where I lived. I could see them when they passed by near the parking lots. When I yelled one of the neighbors came out. He asked me what was wrong, that I looked very frightened. He said he heard someone yelling. He called the police. The police arrived and asked me what was going on, so I told them what had happened. I explained to them and made the report. The police looked for the men that had pointed a gun at me. I described how they were and looked. The police left and later another police arrived with various photos, of those photos I recognized the one that had the gun. I would leave to work with fear that they would come back. The time passed and I had fear to go out of my house to work. The time passed and they scheduled me to court and I presented myself. There at the court were I presented myself, was the man that had pointed the gun at me. I had fear that day of the court and looked at him, he stared at me a