Roper Vs Simmons Case

The subject of the book “The Midnight Assassin” by Skip Hollandsworth is focused on uncovering the truth behind who is truly at fault for the murders of Mollie Smith and, several other victims. The murders occurred in Austin, Texas during the 19th century. Based on the first three chapters, three prominent characters have been introduced. All three characters are currently prime suspects. At the time, Austin was a prestigious town, equipped with the finest law enforcement made first hand by god himself, the Texas Rangers. When the young yellow skinned slave Mollie Smith was murdered, terror truly struck Austin. News reporters from all over Texas came to cover the story, thus creating conspiracies about each suspect. Evaluation of each suspect and their motives to perpetrate such a gruesome murder-Walter Spencer, a hardworking slave, who had never done any harm; Tom Chalmers, the brother of the land owner where the murder took place; Lastly, Dr. Ralph Steiner, the esteemed doctor.

The Missouri State Superior Court sought after the death penalty even though Simmons was only Seventeen years old at the time. Simmons’ was seventeen at the time of the crime and that placed him out in the criminal Jurisdiction of Missouri’s Juvenile Court system

Good Friday, 1973, Kemper planned on waiting for his mother to come home from a party, but accidently fell asleep. He was awakened by the sound of his mother in another room. He then entered her room to find her sitting in bed reading a paperback book. She saw him walk in and said, “I suppose you’re going to want to sit up all night and talk now,” to which he replied, “No, good night,” and beat her to death with a claw hammer. He decapitated her then used her head for sex and a dart board. Once he was done with her, he called her friend, Sally Hallett, over to the house. Upon arrival Kemper strangled her and left the scene and evidence behind. The entire time Kemper was planning and performing the murder of his mom, the memories of the abuse, humiliation, and unfairness that his mother had left him were stuck in his head. His mother had left a permanent scar on young Kemper’s ego which led to his horrific murders.

Frank and Mr. Lacaze are better known for the horrible armed robbery they committed on March 4, 1995. Ms. Frank and Mr. Lacaze went to Kim Anh, a Vietnamese restaurant in east New Orleans, Louisiana where Ms. Frank works an off duty job as the restaurant was closing that morning. Off duty New Orleans Police Officer (Peace Officer) Mr. Ronald Williams, who was currently working the off duty job that night at Kim Anh Vietnamese Restaurant and two of the workers Mr. Cuong Vu who was 17 years old at the time and his sister Ms. Ha Vu who was 24 years old at the time noticed Ms. Frank and Mr. Lacaze entry the store after closing. (HUSTMYRE). All three was shots and killed by Ms. Frank and Mr. Lacaze. Ms. Frank and Mr. Lacaze started to search the restaurant for money, but they did not know there was two other people’s inside of the store who had witnessed the robbery and killing, Ms. Chau Vu who was 23 years old at the time and Mr. Quoc Vu who was 18 years old at the time. Both of them report the incident to the police and Ms. Frank and Mr. Lacaze were both charges with first degree murder in the

The first case deals with the slaying of an 8-year-old girl in Florida. Joshua Phillips, 14, was arrested

At a prep school in Connecticut, a boy named Jamie Watson gets a rugby scholarship to Sherringford. But also home to the great-great-great-granddaughter of the famous detective, Charlotte Holmes. One day after after Watson got settled in he went walking around campus and bumped into Charlotte Holmes, they talked in the middle of the walkway about how Charlotte Holmes’s parents and family had been dying to meet Jamie Watson. Just about a week after he started school Watson bumped into Lee Dobson and got in a fight with Lee Dobson because Dobson was making jokes about Watson and ended up punching him in the face and knocked him out. About 3 days after that incident, there was a murder a few dorm rooms down the hall from his own, Lee Dobson was

No, I do not feel that he deserved death penalty, but serving a year or two seems very minimal to serve for a murder, and I feel that would be just in a case like this. Even though I can understand why he did it, I still feel he deserves to serve some time because it was still a murder and it was not a self-defense case. Someone’s wrong actions, towards you or someone you love, does not make your wrong actions in return right. If you fight fire with fire, you just get burned. I feel hypocritical saying this because, as I stated before, I would have wanted the them killed as well if I was in a similar situation as his, although I do not feel I would be capable of killing someone, I would want to. Even though I would have wanted to, and if I did, I would want to serve at least a small sentence for ending two other

The article discuss how someone by the name of Johnnie O'neal was tending to his own business when he was charged with rape and robbery. A 21 year old woman was robbed and raped at knifepoint. When she told the story, O'Neal was identified as the suspect. He was convicted and his sentence was ten to twenty years in prison. O'Neal states, “I didn't see any hope for me” (O'Neal). He didn't see himself trying to get his name cleared on his own. Once the lawyers from the Legal Aid Society re-investigated O'neal's case, they realized that something was not right. They saw that the story did not match up, so O'Neal name was able to be cleared.

Some of the explanations offered by Professor Humbolt could explain what the three teenagers did, but others, such as that they were reenacting something they saw on TV, seems to be stretching and guessing. Of his explanations, the social peer pressure sounds better for this crime than the rest, but I think this seems more like a case of mob mentality. When these three teens got together, they came up with this idea and were emboldened by each other until they actually went through with the crime. If we want to know for sure if any of these explanations are accurate, we have to interview all three teens individually and then their families and friends, we can then see if the stories match up and try to draw conclusions from the facts we

The two men identified as Michael Wolford; he plead guilty to third degree murder, fire-arm violation, and more. Mr.Wolford was sentenced 30 to 60 years. Also Jaron Young, plead guilty to same charges and was sentenced to 12 1/2 to 25 years. There was a third party involved Paul Sanders who plead not guilty to the murders charges, but plead guilty to drug related conspiracy charges. It has not been disclosed on how long the judge has sentenced Mr. Sanders to serve.

To even further Simmons’ immatureness and poor logic, he went around the town bragging about the murder by saying, he murdered her “because the bitch seen my face” (Legal Research Institute). A few days after the crime was committed, Mrs. Crook’s husband arrived home to find his house in a terrible mess and his wife gone. A fisherman down at the Meramec River had stumbled across Mrs. Crook’s body the very same day her husband arrived home and reported her missing. The following day, Simmons was arrested at his school and charged with the murder of Shirley Crook. Naïve and uneducated on the law, Simmons waived his rights upon his arrival at the Fenton, Missouri police station. He spent a total of two hours in an interrogation room where he confessed and reenacted the murder. After the confession and the grueling details of the murder were unleashed, the State charged him with burglary, kidnaping, stealing, and murder all in the first degree. The State was after the death penalty for Mr. Simmons. Due to Christopher Simmons only being seventeen at the time of the crimes, he ended up being outside of the jurisdiction of Missouri’s juvenile court system. From 1993 to 2002, Simmons’ defense attorney sent an enormous amount of appeals to the state and federal courts of Missouri, but all appeals were denied. His defense

According to Death Penalty Information Center(2005), a Supreme Court ruling was decided in which the court ruled that the execution of persons who were under the age of 18 could not be executed if crimes were committed while a minor. DPIC’s article on US Supreme Court: Roper v. Simmons, No. 03-633(2005) refers the execution of people who committed a capital crime before the age of 18 and older than 15 could not be executed. (2005), DPIC’s article “US Supreme Court: Roper v. Simmons, No. 03-633” argues that these groups of people (minors,mentally impaired) are not of deserving of this punishment due to maturity instability, meanwhile there is still adults with no impairment committing the same crimes. The state legislators from different states

Thomas Graunger, the first juvenile known to be executed in America, was tried and discovered guilty of beastiality in 1642 in Plymouth Colony, MA (Hale, 1997). Since that execution, 361 people have been executed for crimes they were found guilty of when they were adolescents (Streib, 2000).

The two young girls convicted of the crime were 13 at the time of the trial. Even though the two young girls were juveniles they got tried as adults because they seemed to plan the attack months in advance, and it made them seem to dangerous and unsafe in a juvenile court. One of the girls was diagnosed with early onset schizophrenia which led to them being tried in adult court. If juvenile is defined as someone who committed a crime under the age of 18, who can you justify having them in a court designed for adult offenders.

In terms of the death penalty, certain crimes do deserve this punishment, under specific circumstances. Heinous crimes, such as the murder of the 1st and 2nd degree and rape, should be punishable by death. However, this punishment shall only occur so long as the criminal(s) pass both the M'Naghten Rule and the Durham Rule. In the gruesome murders of the Clutters’ family, Perry Edward Smith and Richard Eugene Hitchcock were both deemed perfectly sane under both rules, showing that both men deserved the death penalty. Although there is plenty of proof that Hitchcock was sane, there is also enough evidence to prove that Smith was mentally unstable. Due to this evidence, Hitchcock rightfully got what he deserved, while Smith was wrongfully done.