Summary Of Angelina Napolitano's Case

Through the study of the records of courts, both secular and ecclesiastical, which exists in thousands of European and American archives and libraries, a patient and careful researcher can reconstruct particular images of “the world we have lost” and of the people who inhabited that world. From this vast, largely untapped repository of judicial records, Gene Brucker uses the notarial protocols of Ser Filippo Mazzei, which contains the transcripts of the litigation in the archiepiscopal court and the catasto records, which provides information about Florentine households, to piece together the dossier of Giovanni and Lusanna. The story of Giovanni and Lusanna explores the love and marriage in renaissance Florence and uncovers the gradation of the city’s social hierarchy and the role of women in society.

The way that we deal with criminals today is center and established based on how Cesare Beccaria defined and stated it. Who is Cesare Beccaria? Cesare Beccaria is an Italian scholar born in Milan, Lombardy, Italy on Saturday March 14, 1738. He died at the age of 56 in the same city on Friday, November 28, 1794. Cesare Beccaria was an Italian criminologist, a jurist, a philosopher, and a politician who is widely considered as the most talented jurist [3] and one of the greatest thinkers of the Age of Enlightenment. Recognized to be one of the fathers of classical criminal theory and modern penology, he is well remembered for his writings on “On Crimes and Punishments” written in 1764, which condemned torture and the death penalty, and was a founding work in the field of penology and the Classical school of criminology by promoting criminal justice. (citation)

In this paper I will be answering, “Many people believed that justice had been served when Amanda Knox, Raffaele Sollecito, and Rudy Guede were arrested, prosecuted, and convicted. Italy’s high court recently reversed the convictions of Amanda and Raffaelle. After reading the books, which court do you think got it right—the lower trial court with the guilty verdict or the high court with the not guilty verdict? Why?” I will provide at least three examples, with at least one example coming from each book, to support my response. The books “Honor bound” and “Murder in Italy” talk about the Amanda Knox trial. Amanda’s roommate Meredith Kercher, was found murdered in their home leaving the main suspects to be Amanda and her boyfriend Raffaelle Sollecito.

We discussed the recent mob uprising and the state of unrest in the community. It was the judgment of all present that the life of the defendant, even if the wrong man, could not be saved; that an appeal would so inflame the public that the jail would be attacked and perhaps other prisoners executed by violence. In the opinion of all of us a case was presented where the defendant, now that he had been convicted by a jury, must die by the judgment of the law, or else, if his case were appealed, he would die by the act of the uprising of the people (Pfeifer, “United”).

Angelina Napolitano was a immigrant who came to Canada in 1909. She was married to Pietro. Their marriage was violent as Pietro abused, beat, and threatened his wife. In November 1910 Pietro attacked her with a pocketknife assaulting her causing 9 slashes to her neck, shoulder, chest and arms putting her in the hospital and leaving scars. Pietro was charged with assault but his abuse reign continued after the trial because his sentence was delayed for a period of time. Judges back then would often do this as a prohibition period. If the defendant didn’t break the law again in this period the cases would get thrown out. (Franca Iacovetta)

The national legislative body of a country was now Composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives they created formal labor unions and formed a judicial system with particular discipline. Serial killers, pimps, domestic abusers, rapists, and pedocriminals would simply be euthanised: the decision was made by women in a mass tribunal. This was the the best and most legitimate solution. These men would forever pose a threat to women, children, animals, the earth and society without a chance of stopping their violent behaviour only until after having reached a stage of sadism and sociopathy. It was reckless to waste resources and energy in keeping such men alive in prisons. All of these men’s belongings and resources had been confiscated and given to the women to divide and repurposed for the bettering of the

Then Locallo has to deal with the politics involved. Caruso Sr. is an apparent mobster, and he raises hell in the courtroom because he believes that the eighteen-year term that his son received is too harsh considering that the other two men involved will probably get probation. Caruso tries to make a point that the media and politics forced Locallo into a corner, but Locallo reminds him that his son “planned the attack, led the attack, and …finished the attack,” (Bogira p. 315). The prejudice issue was risen when the Supreme Court insured that the jury would be color-blind, but due to the many issues that surround the reasons for few black jurors (voir dire), only two black women made the jury and no black males. Last the issue of compassion, which allows first-time offenders to receive a lesser sentence. Locallo sentenced Caruso’s co-defendants to probation because the evidence against them wasn’t really there compared to Caruso Jr. himself. As far as Caruso’s sentencing, Judge Locallo decided to give him eight years, because with the other two men only getting probation he didn’t want to look inconsistent by giving Caruso a very stiff sentence.

The abolitionist movement had a strong impact on the world,with Cesare Beccaria’s essay, On Crimes and Punishment, making the biggest impact. In the essay, Beccaria had suggested and theorized that there is no

On 04/21/2017 at 1636 hours, the complainant Miriam Salazar, arrived at the Bladensburg Police Station to report a fraud that occurred at T-Mobile 8427 Greenbelt Road Maryland 20710.

The main summary of Cesare Beccaria’s ‘of crimes and punishment’ was best said in a statement by Beccaria himself which was ‘In order that any punishment should not be an act of violence committed by one person or many against a private citizen, it is essential that it should be public, prompt, necessary, the minimum possible under the given circumstances, proportionate to the crimes, and established by law. ' (Beccaria, C. 2003 pg. 24) Beccaria’s theory was that punishment should only be used to prevent an offender from reoffending and non-offenders from ever offending. This was done by looking at the severity of the punishment, that the punishment should match the crime and should not exceed severity than what is needed to achieve the deterrence of crime. Beccaria is extremely against the idea of torture being used and debates that it should never be used against someone who is still in the stage of being innocent until proven guilty; he is also opposed to the use of capital punishment unless used in extreme restricted situations.

An innocent man is wrongly executed whilst a man who raped and murdered a mother and her thirteen year old daughter spends the rest of his life with three meals a day and cable television. Which of these is the bigger injustice? The use of the death penalty to punish serious crimes is a very controversial topic and there is much debate surrounding the issue. This paper will briefly discuss arguments supporting and against the use of the death penalty.

In 1560, Arnaud du Tilh - the imposter who posed as Martin Guerre - was hanged, with his body burned after his death. Today, execution is a controversial issue, and mediaeval and early modern executions (especially public executions) are viewed through the lens of enlightenment rationalism. However, this is not how public execution was always seen. When studying history, it is important that the historian does not view history through the lens of their own time, but instead the lens of the time they are viewing. This is one of the aims of studying microhistory - to provide the lens through which to observe a place and time. This is how I shall endeavour to use the fascinating case of the faux Martin Guerre - as a lens through which to view the attitudes, methods and reasoning behind public executions, including the execution that claimed the life of Arnaud du Tilh. It was the attitudes towards and legal philosophy of the time towards crime and punishment that led to Arnaud du Tilh’s sentence, so the fundamental question that this essay seeks to answer is why Arnaud was given the sentence that he was. Execution as an institution was not an extension of the state, as it is often seen today, but was instead an extension of the community that was seen as a normal part of the ‘divine order’. Arnaud du Tilh was executed by hanging and then burned due to the specific Christian and folk beliefs and symbolism surround methods of execution, and the execution was public not as a

This paper aims to make an analysis of the short story entitled, “The Vendetta”, written by Guy de Maupassant. “Vendetta”, which means “revenge” in the English language, is the core of this short story, and the concept from which the main character depends upon in order to survive. The story revolved around the revenge of the Widow Saverini because of the death of her son Antoine Saverini. Antoine was killed by a man named, Nicolas Ravolati, who was the object of revenge of Antoine’s mother. The death of her son, and her plot for revenge made her restless and sleepless at nights, thus, motivating her to avenge the death of Antoine.

In society there many things that are debated among the people based on their beliefs, morals, and values. For this paper chose the death penalty because it is one of the highly debated topics in not only today’s society but also in the past. The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, it used as a procedure of retaliation against those who commit violent crimes such as murder and other capital crimes. There are many forms of this punishment, for instance, the electric chair, lethal injections, and the firing squad. There are many feelings and arguments in relation to capital punishment. Some people believe that the death penalty is moral because they deserve it and it provides protection to the society. However, in this paper I will argue that capital punishment is totally immoral because it is not fair, is it unnecessary, and unethical.

Capital punishment is beneficial to the community. It provides the society with a sense of security. The death penalty contains a positive influence on the future. A heavily debated topic is, “Does capital punishment deter people more than a life sentence to prison?” An explanation on why will be covered later. An issues many people have with capital punishment, is when it is just or not just. This is a topic many stray away from, because it is difficult to decide. Finding the right consequence for an action is difficult. While this paper is for the use of capital punishment, it is clearly not needed for every crime, or even every murder. Overusing capital punishment, such as using it for every murder, will negatively impact the country, and not using it has the same effect.