Jordan Peterson Case

The prosecutor improperly questioned the alibi witness about his failure to come forward with exculpatory information. The trial abused its discretion by not reopening the suppression hearing, at which the defendant was represented by ineffective counsel” (Appellate Squawk, 2016). He had no prior arrests or records on file and that seemed not to phase the court. With the consent of the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office and extensive investigations by the Innocence Project, the court released Andre Hatchett dismissing his indictment. He had been wrongfully convicted based on the questionable credibility of a man who has had a career in criminal activity. Also, information was withheld from the court and the defense counsel that could have led Mr. Hatchett’s

Twenty years later information surfaced that suggested that the evidence in the two previous trials had been tampered with. The Assistant District Attorney, with the help of Evers's widow, began compiling a new case. (Elliot Jr., pg.1)

Christmas Eve of 2002, husband, Scott Peterson calls in his wife’s disappearance. His wife, Laci, was eight months pregnant. Four months after the disappearance, the remains of Laci and Conner were found a day apart washed up on the shore of Point Isabel State Park. The bodies were found a day apart. Scott was convicted of the murder of his wife and his unborn baby, but I am convinced that Scott should be walking the streets a free man. I believe he did not murder his expecting wife—his actions were justified by his shock, he was simply enjoying his last month of “non-daddy” freedom, and I think Scott was framed by Laci.

In “The Adversary Judge” Frankel explains how realities of the trial create a “role conflict” between the ideally constructed impartial judge and the realistic adversary judge (Frankel, 1976). Throughout their day people play many roles, these roles are based on the expectations of the people around them and the personality of the person (Frankel, 1976). In particular, judges are expected to play the role of neutrality, intelligence, and patience. Their role is thought to be similar of an “umpire” (Frankel, 1976). It is necessary for them to be objective in order for a just and fair trial to take place. Yet, this ideal role does not occur under the pressure of realities. One reality that pushes away the idea of an “umpire” judge is the heated emotions that occur throughout the trial process. Frankel states” the courtroom explodes as people spring up at several tables shouting objections, usually loudly because they are in some haste and heat to cut off forbidden answers” (Frankel, 1976, p. 472). The attorney’s main goals throughout the trail is to ensure a win for their client leading to competitiveness between both parties. Attorneys do not want to hear they are wrong and always need to be one step ahead of their competitors. This causes the commotion and tense emotions that is usually seen in courts.

On October 7th I was present at the courthouse from 8: 45 am-10: 45 am. During that initial visit, I was very nervous; since it is a small courthouse I stood out like a sore thumb. I was “over dressed” in comparison to the other actors that were present, even though I was wearing slacks, an FIU Honor’s Polo, and flats. The Assistant State Attorney was Demetrios Efstratiou who was at least professionally dressed. There was Public Defenders present, but I did not catch their names, nor could I locate them on the Internet. Both gentlemen were dressed professionally as well. The only actor during this visit that was dressed unprofessionally was a private defense attorney Jessica Reilly, who is a partner at one of the bigger firms in Key

People tend to become confused on the differences between motive and evidence which are completely different in definition, yet have a few similarities as well when discussing how they tie into one another. Motive, as defined by Merriam Webster is “a reason for doing something”. For example, one’s motive for robbing a bank could be to pay of college debts. Evidence as defined by Merriam Webster is something which shows that something else exists or is true. For example, evidence to a murder could be a potential suspects fingerprints found on the gun used to execute a victim. How these two words, “evidence” and “motive”, words with completely different meanings can tie to each other is that in a case evidence could help find one’s motive for

In the 1992 comedic film, My Cousin Vinny, the story of a murder trial of two Brooklyn college kids finding themselves subject to southern justice, is depicted. Their only hope, is Vincent Gambino, one of the defendant‘s cousins. Joe Pesci plays Vincent Gambino, a personal injury lawyer barely able to pass the bar after multiple attempts. Vinny agrees to defend them, even though he has never tried a case in Brooklyn, much less a capital murder case in Georgia. He faces not only a seasoned prosecutor, but a Yale educated judge. Evidentiary foundations, discovery and disclosures, and cross examination technique may all be beyond Vinny’s experience, but over the course of the film, he is able to enhance his talents. He begins to understand and apply the procedures and customs of the court.

Those were Adrian Peterson’s final numbers in yesterday’s game. At age 30, he leads the NFL in rushing yards with 961. He leads the NFL in rushes of 20 yards or longer. He leads the NFL in yards after contact. He basically leads the NFL in almost every rushing category this season.

Through my research on this critical thinking paper I have learned that the quality of the defendant’s defense lawyer is perhaps the single

Drew Peterson is well-known around the Chicagoland area. His trial was well publicized across the country, but the people in and around Chicago are particularly vested in his fate. Peterson was a Bolingbrook police officer who was married four times. His third wife died under suspicious circumstances and his fourth, much younger wife simply vanished.

On 02/06/2017, at approximately 1715 hours, while I was conducting meal distribution and ID Headcount in Durango Jail, 3225 W. Gibson Lane, Phoenix, AZ 85009, Housing Unit D-3, Pod D. When Inmate Peterson, Jordan T324870, cell 57-2 received his meal tray, I noticed he had dried blood stains on his shirt, his left eye, left cheek and left corner of his lip were bruised and swollen. At that time I asked the inmate what happened and he replied, "It’s nothing." I told him to step out of the pod and have a seat in the multipurpose room of the housing unit.

In 1982, Alton Logan was charged and sentenced to life in prison for the first-degree murder of a McDonald’s security guard in Illinois after three witnesses identified him despite the fact that several family members gave testimonies stating that Logan was home in the bed when the murder occurred (CBSNews, 2008). Around the same time attorneys Dale Coventry and Jamie Kunz were defending a man named Andrew Wilson was facing similar charges in the same jurisdiction who confessed to them that he killed the McDonalds security guard, and that Alton Logan was innocent (CBSNews, 2008). The two attorneys, being bound by the Attorney-Client Privilege and their duty of confidentiality to their client they did not come forward with the information that could have relieved Logan from the charges and his life sentence. Wilson gave the attorney’s permission to disclose the information upon his death and they took necessary measures to preserve the information until the time came when they would be able to share it (CBSNews, 2008).

I. BACKGROUND: CelluComm and GMCT and the Industry AT&T’s Bell Laboratories cellular telephone networking innovation had enabled several cellular network operators to get licenses from the FCC to operate in separate license territories right about the same time AT&T was broken up in early 1980s. These operators were either companies like Cellular Communication Services, Inc. (CelluComm) or small entrepreneurs who had won license territories through the lottery system. CelluComm’s  president  and  founder  Ric  Jenkins  was  known  for  being  an  aggressive businessman  who  had  extended  it  to  a  200  million  dollar  enterprise  ranking  in  the  top  20  of  the industry.  Key  to

Funny I didn’t think of it before. I guess you try to forget those things. Anyone who’s ever used a switch knife would never have stabbed downward. You don’t handle a switch knife that was. You us it underhand,” (Rose, 25). This helps convince some of the other jurors to change their vote to not guilty. His contribution of information made the jurors think more about their vote. His character grows from being meek to being an important factor in the result of the case being a fair trial. There is still other prejudice that made one juror still vote guilty.

“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