Amanda Knox Summary

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

The way that we deal with criminals today is center and established based on how Cesare Beccaria defined and stated it. Who is Cesare Beccaria? Cesare Beccaria is an Italian scholar born in Milan, Lombardy, Italy on Saturday March 14, 1738. He died at the age of 56 in the same city on Friday, November 28, 1794. Cesare Beccaria was an Italian criminologist, a jurist, a philosopher, and a politician who is widely considered as the most talented jurist [3] and one of the greatest thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment. Recognized to be one of the fathers of classical criminal theory and modern penology, he is well remembered for his writings on “On Crimes and Punishments” written in 1764, which condemned torture and the death penalty, and was a founding work in the field of penology and the Classical school of criminology by promoting criminal justice. (citation)

It is common knowledge that crime exists all over the world and that justice and punishment may vary in different countries and societies. However, how justice and punishment is enforced in a society and globally is not common knowledge. Global justice refers to the belief that the world is unjust; while social justice, in a manner of speaking, refers to the fair treatment of everyone in a society.(“Social Justice”). Both social and global justice value human rights, remove inequality, and holds people accountable for fair practices.(“Social Justice”). If someone commits the same crime as another person, for example, they should receive the same punishment. That is what most people would be inclined to believe, but in the reading “The Moral Ambivalence of Crime in an Unjust Society” by Jeffrey Reiman, crime and justice is reviewed and defined in an uncommon way. Reiman discusses justice in a society where a crime was committed against him and his wife.

The criminal courts are responsible for determining the guilt or innocence of the person that is accused (Griffiths, 2015, p.147). As well as the courts are supposed to conclude the appropriate sentence while protecting their rights of the accused. The outcome that comes from the criminal courts is that the judgement is made to be fair, impartial and no political intrusion. Furthermore, the main focus of the courts is the find the fundamental problems, the interagency and interdisciplinary collaboration and the accountability to the community. (Griffiths, 2015, p.147). The court is supposing to keep the fairness and equality through the society.

In this paper I will be answering, “Many people believed that justice had been served when Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Rudy Guede were arrested, prosecuted, and convicted. Italy’s high court recently reversed the convictions of Amanda and Raffaelle. After reading the books, which court do you think got it right—the lower trial court with the guilty verdict or the high court with the not guilty verdict? Why?” I will provide at least three examples, with at least one example coming from each book, to support my response. The books “Honor bound” and “Murder in Italy” talk about the Amanda Knox trial. Amanda’s roommate Meredith Kercher, was found murdered in their home leaving the main suspects to be Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaelle Sollecito.

The role of the judge in the adversary system of trial, unlike the inquisitorial counterpart, has less involvement in the establishment of facts and the analysis of evidence in cases brought before the court. In the inquisitorial system of trial, the judge has a much more active role in relation to the handling and evaluation of evidence, and where relevant, can actually cross examine and question witnesses if they feel crucial evidence may have been missed. While the inquisitorial system of trial has a seemingly more intrusive judge, having an added legal expert questioning and raising areas where evidence may have been missed, is a significant improvement over a judge who may know evidence has been missed but cannot intervene such is the

The case that shocked Chicago ravaged the front pages of newspapers, was the talk of the town, and became infamous throughout Illinois and the U.S. The savage and questionable murder of a young, sweet boy proved all anyone could talk about in summer 1924. The media went haywire when the details about the murder and motive seemed different than any before. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb committed a murder so violent and brutal that their excuse committing it was simply because they wanted to commit the perfect crime. The Leopold and Loeb trial contained so many nuances, twists, and turns that the media rightfully dubbed it the “Crime of the Century.” The trial Chicago v. Leopold and Loeb of 1924 brought together America by bringing awareness to capital punishment in the justice system.

In many countries across the world people are wrongfully convicted by a system whose sole purpose is to protects its citizens. Wrongful convictions are a grave miscarriage of justice. A report Published by Nation Registry of Exonerations stated that 149 people were cleared in 2015 for crimes that they did not commit in the United States (Ferner, 2016), this number is staggering. Also, in Japan 162 wrongful convicted between 1910 and 2010 (Johnson, 2015). With that said, a lot of people is being detained for crimes they did not commit in every region of the world, meanwhile the real culprits are left to roam freely. Common reasons for wrongful conviction in the United states and Japan are harsh and long interrogations, witness identification, errors or misconduct of the law enforcement and jailhouse informants also known as snitches, but mostly lack of DNA evidences. Even though, these countries have constitutional rights for its citizens, the reasons for wrongful convictions are similar.

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.

The criminal trial process is an interesting process that takes place in Courtrooms all across the United States and throughout the globe. This study intends to set out the various steps in the criminal trial process in the American justice system. A trial is described as a "legal forum for resolving individual disputes, and in the case of a criminal charge, it is a means for establishing whether an accused person is legally guilty of an offense. The trial process varies with respect to whether the matter at issue is civil in nature or criminal. In either case, a jury acts as a fact-finding body for the court in assessing information and evidence that is presented by the respective parties in a case. A judge presides over the court and addresses all the legal issues that arise during the trial. A judge also instructs the jury how to apply the facts to the laws that will govern in a given case." (3rd Judicial District, 2012)

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

How can the police act out in such an outrageous behavior as they have done so? How can they charge an individual based on their intuition? Or better yet, how can a police officer brutally beat an individual within an interrogation? Through the criminology theory; critical and conflict I will use these method to potentially explain the crimes that were enacted within the Amanda Knox vs. Perugia, Italy.

“Witness for the Prosecution” superbly demonstrated a realist view of the operating procedures in a courtroom. The actors within the courtroom were easy to identify, and the steps transitioned smoothly from the arrest to the reading of the verdict. The murder trial of Leonard Vole provided realistic insight into how laws on the books are used in courtroom proceedings. With the inferior elements noted, the superior element of the court system in “Witness

Since the beginning of the regime on criminal law, countries across the world have been focused on the rights of the accused and not those of victim. This is because of the consideration that the accused is alone and the government as well as the societal machinery is running against him.