Criminal Law: The Case Of Jack Farrell

During the year of 2015, a case that the Innocence Project was working on at the time was the Joseph Buffey Case. Joseph Buffey was convicted in 2001 in West Virginia of rape and robbery. Mr. Buffey pled guilty to the crimes based on the advise of his counsel and witness misidentification which was the heart of this investigation. On May 11, 2015, Mr. Buffey was excluded by DNA and the real perpetrator was later found. Mr. Buffey served a total of 15 years in prison for a crime that he did not commit. DNA Exonerations makes up 334 total cases that the Innocence Project has worked on. The following numbers overlap with the 334 cases. 237 cases involved misidentification by witnesses, 154 were the result of improper forensics, 92 were due to

Chapter 9 focuses on special topics, which reviews the five present and controversial issue in the criminal justice system. Out of all 5 of these issues I think that the use of confidential informants in war on drug is the most harmful to our nation’s correctional system and should be eliminated. The reason I think that the use of confidential informants should be eliminated drug war on drugs is because the use of CI’s frequently have negative consequence on the war on drugs (Austin & Irwin, 2012). The first example, is that CI’s are not appropriately screened and supervised, which causes innocent individuals to be arrest. In my opinion, I think that if CI’s are going to be used then they should be supervised at all time because the lack

Champion, D.J. (2009). Leading U.S. supreme court cases in criminal justice: Briefs and key terms. Upper Saddle river, NJ: Prentice Hall.

In the case of Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the Supreme Court ruled that a law may not punish a status; i.e., one may not be punished to being an alcoholic or for being addicted to drugs. However, of course, one may be punished for actions such as abusing drugs. The question becomes; What if the status “forces” the action? What if a person, because of his/her addiction to drugs, is “forced” by the addiction to purchase and abuse the illegal drugs? Would punishing that person be unfairly punishing a status?

According to the National Registry of Exonerations (1),(2), from the year 2016 alone shows a record number of 166 exonerations, which almost one-third are wrongful homicide convictions.

Since the beginning of time, the United States’ Criminal Justice System (CJS) has been scrutinized and will continue to be. If significant changes were to occur within the CJS it could potentially take decades. Different persons, institutions, governments, and even departments within governments have different views; it is a natural occurrence. Thus, as with any subject matter, there are always controversies that cause disruption within society. Often, the controversies stem from the lack of understanding and the historical patterns of unsupported data.

We hear in the news about police misconduct, use of excessive force, embezzlement, but one thing I found while researching what I should write this paper on is the Wrongful convictions of innocent men and women, that spend years in prison being innocent, and there is nothing that gets done till it’s too late. Some wrongful convictions are honest mistakes, but many times law enforcement and prosecutors lose sight of the obligation of ensuring truth and justice, and are focused on their conviction rates. As with any job, they are honest people and ones that just don’t care and are corrupt, this exists in the criminal justice system. One way to prove someone is innocent now is through DNA testing, but even at all levels of a criminal investigation there could be misconduct or mishandling of evidence, which then causes the evidence to become compromised.

Argue for or against the theory that the courts should not hold a defendant of questionable competency to the standard sentencing guidelines.

A criminal background check revealed Richard Brown was negative for CANTS/LEAD (5/3/16). His criminal background check from the Illinois State Police (5/3/2016) and FBI (5/3/2016) were positive. In 1986, Richard was charged with contribution of delinquency to a minor. The girl told Mr. Brown she was 18, but she was only 14. For his restitution Richard paid a $100 fine and served six months of supervision. This is Richard's only run in with the law; he has not been in trouble with the law since 1986. He has since been a model citizen. Inquiries into the National Sex Offender Registry (5/2/2016) and the Illinois Sex Offender Registry on (5/2/2016) revealed no offenses for Richard Brown. A criminal background check revealed Vickie Brown was

In the case of Donnelly v Dunn in 2015, two appellants were convicted in the sheriff court for contravening section 1 of the Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (Scotland) Act 2012, whereby it criminalises, inter alia, the social issue of sectarianism at regulated football matches. This case raises the question of whether the appellants had their ‘right to know’ infringed after being criminally liable for their actions. The comment will consider this point in depth and whether the 2012 Act is clear about what it criminalises.

We hear in the news about police misconduct, use of excessive force, embezzlement, but one thing I found while researching what I should write this paper on is the Wrongful convictions of innocent men and women, that spend years in prison being innocent, and there is nothing that gets done till it’s too late. Some wrongful convictions are honest mistakes, but many times law enforcement and prosecutors lose sight of the obligation of ensuring truth and justice, and are focused on their conviction rates. As with any job, they are honest people and ones that just don’t care and are corrupt, this exists in the criminal justice system. One way to prove someone is innocent now is through DNA testing, but even at all levels of a criminal investigation there could be misconduct or mishandling of evidence, which then causes the evidence to become compromised.

The differences between legal rules and other kinds of rules is that criminal law refers to the consequences associated with breaking them. As the substantive law meaning that it is the law of crimes, referring that Criminal law is the code conduct that all in the society need to follow the rule, and the prohibitions on murder, assault, and burglary. Meaning that if an individual violates or commits these crimes they are going to be treated as a criminal by punishing act from the state. Civil law is refers to procedural law to follow the rule of the state from someone that has committed a crime. Which it is divided into 5 categories, for example torts, property, contract, family, and juvenile law.

Every professional in the criminal justice system is held to a much higher standard compared to employees in other businesses in the United States. It is important that anyone within the criminal justice system has a strong moral code, has ethical conduct, and always makes ethical decisions. Police officers, lawyers, prosecutors, judges, and correctional officers are faced with making extremely tough decisions with very little time to think about the situation at hand. Having sound judgment and the ability to make ethical decisions is a key factor for that professional to be successful in their career. Ethics are the backbone of the criminal justice system, which can make or break the system.

I am Dawson McCarty, I am raising money for a potential Lawyers of America Program. This program is called "Intensive Law & Trial" I was invited by Stanford Law School to attend this program. This program will teach me to immerse myself in the theory and practice of law, and to develop a roadmap to becoming a lawyer. I will learn the practice of law, legal rhetoric, and ethics from preeminent legal professionals, including Stanford Law School professors. I will also develop and practice essential legal skills such as making impactful opening and closing arguments, preparing cases, and readying witnesses for cross-examinations. The money I recieve will only go towards paying for the camp. I will have to get the money for transportation on my

Jack Farrell fakes his death by killing a man, messing up his body and having tattoos drawn onto the corpses legs and body to match his own. He left his clothes and a suicide note with his signature at one end of the English channel and left the corpses washed up 100km down the channel a week later. This Red Herring was very successful, as during the story the main character, Andy, ID the body and came to the conclusion that it was in fact Farrell’s body. It appeared to be the end of that as they explained how Jack sold out his ‘legitimate’ business to leave money for his wife and killed himself because he could not handle his daughters death. As the story moved on we believed that there was a secret killer, eliminating the competition