Presumed Innocent Essay

The factors of social impression of discrepancy, the impact of the media, and the misinterpretation of investigating police and prosecution played a significant role in the resulting failure of justice

Identifying who the guilty are is much easier said than done. Identification of the guilty has been an issue for a long time. Often such identifications consisted of using discriminatory categories in order to identify suspects. The police have been discriminating individuals based on their gender, skin color, race, eye color, height and weight (Ingram, 2009). However, these descriptive characteristics are not the only ones the police were using, in fact, blood typing, fingerprinting, and DNA matching, have been added to the list (Ingram, 2009). These types of identification methods cannot be disputed as easily. Of course, DNA can be tainted and people can be framed, but for the most part, it was better

On February 26, 2012, an apparently innocent teenager was shot as he walked home through his neighborhood late at night. The Trayvon Martin killing and trial has recently been one of the primary topics covered by the media in America. The response to the news coverage of the case has been staggering. Students have organized hoodie marches and created Facebook groups to protest the unjustified murder of the young man. However, is the American public as well informed as it pretends to be? Americans have an unsettling susceptibility to manipulation from the media. In 1991, a similar event occurred in the case of the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings, where Supreme Court nominee, Clarence Thomas, had his personal affairs put on display for

In March of 1963, the Phoenix Police Department brought in an accused to their departments to investigate him. Upon arriving to the police department two detectives interrogated him about the rape of a mildly, handicap young woman and a kidnap. After two hours of interrogating the suspect, Ernesto Miranda, confessed to the crime just after the detectives told him the victim had identified him in a lineup. Ernesto Miranda was found guilty of both crimes and was sentenced to twenty to thirty years in prison. In 1966, three years later, Miranda’s sentence was overturned by the Supreme Court due to the fact that Miranda was not notified about his fifth or sixth amendment. His fifth amendment gave him the right to avoid self-incrimination by

The U.S. Constitution guarantees some very basic rights to any citizen who is accused of a crime. The biggest right of all is the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. In other words, until and unless it can be proven without any doubt that you committed a crime, you will be considered not guilty.

The legal portion of the constitution is built on “innocent until proven guilty”. It establishes fairness and equality to the people.

While the presumption of innocence is not laid out explicitly in the U.S. Constitution, the Supreme Court has ruled stating that “the presumption of innocence is evidence in favor of the accused, introduced by the law in his behalf” (Coffin v. United States). John Ashcroft, Attorney General of the United States, should have known that his statements did not give the defendant his due presumption of innocence.

The United States prides itself on having robust, deeply entrenched measures implemented across its core agencies, including the police and criminal justice system, to safeguard against wrongfully convicting people who, after further reflection, are factually found to be innocent. As citizens, we have been educated to trust, among other things, that our systems protect the notions that one is innocent until proven guilty and that prosecution must prove any charges beyond a reasonable doubt. Yet, wrongful convictions are more prevalent than we might think. In particular, the publicity of hundreds of cases over the last few decades has put a spotlight on this indisputable

Innocent until proven guilty is a phrase that applies to our judicial system in modern times; however, when the play Doubt by John Patrick Stanley was written this phrase did not always apply. The play is a parable that makes you think about how gossip and rumors can cause havoc and potentially ruin someone’s career. In the play the rumors that are flying are rumors about whether or not Father Flynn is innocent or guilty to the crime of molesting a young boy named Donald Muller. Critics still argue whether he was innocent or guilty to the crime today, and no answer is known. However, based on the evidence in Patrick Shanley’s play Doubt: A Parable, one could conclude that Father Flynn is innocent due to the fact that he had reasonable evidence

It was seen excitingly by the common people as justice. However, the energy of these events has changed over time too. Today, it is the belief that you’re innocent until proven guilty and the appeal process that is in place to prevent wrongful executions. Although, the appeal process is a seven step process and can take a lot of time to complete, see Appendix-Image 2 for steps (Hoskins,2011). However, not everyone agrees this formal method is working. This shift of views on constitutionality can be credited to four socialization aspects of a person and change over time with the evolving factors on a person’s beliefs and values. Ultimately, socializers are very situational and change over time, as well as, major factors like regional, economical, and family relations can also affect a person’s

The O. J. Simpson double murder trial is perhaps the most publicized case this decade. However, before the police can arrest Simpson and prosecute him, they must investigate. The

Everyone has heard of the OJ Simpson court case – a rich and famous man is accused of murdering his ex wife and despite an overwhelming amount of evidence presented against him, he somehow manages to be found not guilty. Many people find themselves wondering how that could possibly happen. Was his defense team simply that good? Were there mistakes made? Was he actually innocent? Simpson’s case is not the only one that has yielded such a strange outcome because of his status and stellar defense team, and certainly not the only court case to cause such an uproar in the media. Martha Stewart’s 2001 case, Scott Peterson’s 2004 case, and Lorena Bobbitt’s 1994 case are all examples of court trials that sparked interest in the eye of America.

During the infamous O.J. Simpson trial the television news media was ever present. Placing the trial as a top news story set in motion the idea that this trial was an important issue. However, the television news media was not successful at determining whether O.J. was guilty or not. For this reason, the O.J. Simpson trial is an excellent example of the Agenda Setting Theory. This paper will analyze the role the theory has in the murder trial. Television news outlets support this theory by showing people the Simpson case was important through constant coverage, but was not successful at telling the audience what to think on the issue.

Have you ever been grounded or punished by your parent’s for something you honestly didn’t do? Maybe your sibling or friend stole something or hurt someone and the blame and the “horrible” consequences were put on you. No phone, no TV, no friends over, confined to your room. Straight tortures and a feeling of betrayal and dishonesty from everyone around you. Now, imagine being an adult wrongfully accused of a major crime such as an armed robbery or murder, which they didn’t commit, except it isn’t being grounded or their parents they 're worried about, its sitting behind bars, no longer a free citizen, fighting for their freedom with most likely one of the following things happened such as an eyewitness identified the wrong individual, false confessions, Perjury, maybe even forensic science error. Imagine as a child how you felt being grounded in the comfort of our own home. Just picture how an individual would feel wrongfully convicted in a cold, 10x10 box with a cold cot to sleep on! The injustice of being convicted and imprisoned for a crime one did not commit is intuitively apparent. I would take being grounded over a jail cell any day.

Lord Phillip and Brown presume ‘the man on the street would define ‘miscarriage of justice’ as the conviction of the innocent. It was stated in the Court of Appeal case of Exp.Bateman(1994) that man might define the term more broadly, to include those convicted when they should not have been. In countries the policing the law we see that more power has been vested in the police which is one reason for the crime control model to cause miscarriages of justice. Specially in America after the 9/11 terrorist attack the government has taken measures to prevent crimes as much as possible. The 9/11 attack not only influenced the government but influence the society to look at people an a suspicious way. For example after the 9/11 attack a muslim person, with his beard and his dress code, walks in the street with a bag on his hand or back, people look at him as if he is a terrorist with a bomb. This view of society should change for it is society that subjects the police and the government to undue pressure.