Task 1
Mrs Woodholme’s Retirement
Three former students of Mrs Woodholme’s wanted to send her a text telling her what she meant to them, and to congratulate her on her retirement. The contrasts between the two first texts are severe, as the first one does not contain a single vocabulary word, and only half the words are spelled correctly. In comparison, the second text contains a rich and advanced vocabulary, and no misspelled words. While text 1 and 2 are both extremes on each end of a pole, text 3 is a more sensible and understandable type of text according to the setting.
One of the problems with the first text, is that it contains too many abbreviations. Shortening words like just and want to, to “Jst wanna” is unprofessional and makes
…show more content…
The short story starts with two police officers, debating whether or not they should bring the stubborn witness, Mr Struthers, directly to the lieutenant as he requested, or if they should try and talk to him themselves. The witness reluctantly complies at the end, admitting that he was too nervous to speak to anyone other than the lieutenant.
Mr Struthers describes the brutal murder of Mrs Anderson, and explains that he and the killer came face to face. He eventually agrees to identify the killer of Mrs Anderson through a line-up of suspects, but only if he is not visible to the killer, saying “if he sees me, it’s all off. I won’t go through with it if he can see me.”. At the end, he comes face to face with lieutenant Anderson, and in a panic, Mr Struthers suspiciously changes his mind and calls the whole thing off.
According to Edgar Allan Poe’s definition of a short story, it should be short enough to read in one sitting. Eyewitness fits this description quite perfectly, as it is only two pages long, but still manages to be an entertaining, and otherwise, complex story. It gave us everything a story should have, like an introduction to the story and an interesting plotline, while remaining short enough to be read in one
Eyewitness testimony is a hot button issue in not only the criminal justice field but also the psychology field as well. It continues to be argued that this type of “evidence” is far too unreliable for the court room and can ultimately end up punishing the wrong person for a crime they did not commit. The influence of an eyewitness testimony cannot be denied as research has showed that, “adding a single prosecution eyewitness to a murder trial summary increased the percentage of mock jurors’ guilty verdicts from 18 to 72” (Leippe, Manion, & Romanczyk, p. 182, 1992). In the article discussed here, researchers will look into various age groups to see if age has an effect on the credibility of eyewitness testimonies while attempting to discern what certain cues build upon such credibility.
The social implication that have happened with a better understanding of eyewitness testimony are quite big. Because of the thousand and thousand of crime that have been made by people, we cant really trust everyone testimony of the situation. Because pretty much a conversation with someone else can easily mess every thing up. Which could suck for the person who is taken to jail because a of a eyewitness mistake. When the real criminal is out their actually doing more harm to others. Its actually scary to think how many individuals might be in jail for years of their life knowing that they had nothing to do with a crime that they weren’t even involved
Mexicans immigrated to the United States back in the 1800's (Stanford, 2006). During 1848 the United States took over a part of Mexico which is now the Southwest (Stanford, 2006). Mexicans living in these areas were Mexican citizens before the acquisition. The United States even went into agreements with Mexico to have Mexicans work in the United States. Mexicans were treated with cruelty, while working the agriculture fields for years. The United States made several agreements with Mexico to have the Mexicans come work in the United States while American soldiers were fighting in the world wars. The labor shortage that the United States went through was reason enough to have Mexicans migrate to the United States as laborers. The United
Eyewitness testimony has been used for many centuries and continues to be a part of our criminal justice system. Although, there has been many controversy debates on whether to allow the continuation of these testimonies in court, and allow it to be used as evidence. Eyewitness testimony can either be harmful or useful for an individual. We must fully analysis and see what certain factors (psychological, and age wise) come into the equation before coming up with final conclusions.
A defendant’s guilt is often determined in a single moment of fleeting emotion. A pointed finger, accompanied by the solidifying eyewitness statement “He’s the one!” is enough for a jury to make its final decision in a court case. Although it is understandable, when faced opposite of the individual creating the accusation, to place one’s belief in the accusation made, the credibility of the eyewitness’s account of events are rarely taken into consideration. Psychologists have taken part in research that recognizes the unreliable nature of eyewitness statements used to determine guilt because of the instability of long term memory acquisition and because of this, eyewitness accounts of situations should not be used before a jury in court.
I am not sure what you are asking what pace? But I will try to answer this the best I can. I think that when there is an eyewitness I feel the defendant should also have a right to challenge the eyewitness since eyewitness testimony can be corrupted by societal influences, power of suggestion, and other variables (e.g. distance where crime was witnessed, lighting, or even who the eyewitness also spoke to prior to being interviewed by police). But, if there is even the slightest chance that DNA is present in a crime, it should be tested in a timely manner. This also includes investigating for fingerprints, security video footage, or trace evidence left behind that can specifically
Professor Farris, eyewitness evidence is not perfect; however, law enforcement agencies still use lineups, show-ups, and photographic arrays today. The professionals have taken a closer look at eyewitness evidence, precisely at the effectiveness of identifying suspects from lineups and photographic arrays. Law enforcement officers in the United States investigate millions of crimes per year; considering, a percentage of law enforcement agencies investigate crimes that involve the use of police arranged identification procedures. "The National Institute of Justice (NIJ) has initiated a multisite field experiment of eyewitness evidence to examine the effectiveness and the accuracy of the crucial and influential component of the Nation's Criminal
This paper examines six research articles that include research conducted on both eyewitness testimony and plea bargaining, while also reviewing a dataset from a study conducted on both issues. The main questions addressed here are whether or not eyewitness testimony affects court proceedings as a whole and how eyewitness testimony affects the outcome of the plea bargaining process. Each article covered presents different opinions and ideas on this topic, offering a non-biased overview on the matter at hand. While these articles may present different ideas the general definitions as to what eyewitness testimony consists of, along with what a plea bargain is remains consistent. The dataset that is reviewed was pulled from Pezdek’s study, “Influence
Eyewitness identification and testimony play a huge role in the criminal justice system today, but skepticism of eyewitnesses has been growing. Forensic evidence has been used to undermine the reliability of eyewitness testimony, and the leading cause of false convictions in the United States is due to misidentifications by eyewitnesses. The role of eyewitness testimony in producing false confessions and the factors that contribute to the unreliability of these eyewitness testimonies are sending innocent people to prison, and changes are being made in order to reform these faulty identification procedures.
I worked as a municipal police officer for many years. I have been to countless scenes and made thousands of arrests over my career. Several of these arrests were crimes that included an eyewitness. Policy dictated the if there was ever a witness to a scene, to require that witness to fill out a voluntary statement form about what they saw. There have been several incidents where I was very grateful that the witnesses had filled out a statement. I remember an attempted burglary scene where witnesses observed the suspect forcing entry into a closed business. When detectives went and followed up with the witness the next day, the witness had already forgotten what clothing the suspect was wearing. This incident made me start wondering about how many cases have been
There have been many innocent people wrongfully convicted due to eyewitness confessions in court. Eyewitness memory is one of the oldest forms of evidence used and has been a powerful evidence for judges. Although judges see this information credible, studies have shown that eyewitness memory is not reliable in courts and is the leading cause of wrongful convictions.
Do you believe that men and women are portrayed equally within literature? As the patriarchal ideology is systemically rooted throughout history, these views have undoubtedly become manifested within literary works. As a result, a feminist literary critic would condemn the notion of equal characterization between genders and argue otherwise. Often, men are portrayed as strong and independent leaders aligned with the concept of masculinity while women are portrayed as weak and dependent on those powerful men. Despite critical acclaims of the strength within William Shakespeare’s female characters, the women in Hamlet do not defy their sexist feminine stereotypes; instead, they are illustrated as merely tools that enable men and protect their
An eyewitness memory is an individual's sporadic memory for a crime or other dramatic event that he or she has witnessed. The study of eyewitness memory is a study that reveals that the mind is swayed through propositions. That means that the memory being recalled could be unreliable due to misleading implications of a question. Loftus states, "Current theories regarding memory are derived largely from studies including lists regarding words or sentences, many memories in occurring everyday living involve complex, generally visual, and often action-packed events.” According to Loftus, is vital to study eyewitness memory because it enables us to ration and estimate the fact behind eyewitness testimonies.
This person is unlike any of the passengers aboard the Stamboul-Calais coach. Hildegarde Schmidt tells Poirot she saw a man in a Wagon Lit Conductor's uniform moving quickly down the hallway that matched Hardman's description. The passengers attempt to create an enemy and a person that entered the train, murdered Ratchett and quickly left. The passengers use the idea of a typical murderer to convince Poirot that the mysterious person kills Ratchett. The twelve murderers use the concealment and the lie to hide their identities and erase any connection to the Armstrong case.
The reliability of eyewitness testimony has become a popular research topic in applied and social psychology since Loftus and Palmer’s study in 1974 (see Steblay, 1997; Wright & Loftus, 1998; Deffenbacher, Bornstein, Penrod, & McGorty, for reviews). Participants viewed videos or slides of traffic accidents (Loftus & Palmer, 1974) or a criminal act (Roediger, Jacoby, McDermott, 1996; Cutler, Penrod, & Martens, 1987) and afterwards were asked several questions about what they had just seen. The manipulation in studies was that the researchers did not ask the same question to all participant, but instead changed the wording of one critical detail in the question. In Loftus and Palmer’s study, some of the subjects were asked “About how fast