The Suspects Are Not Justified And Are Guilty As Charge

I think a Natural Law School follower would have found the men not guilty of murder. Again this is based upon the reading, back story,

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

4. In this case law and morality are intertwined. The law says that it is wrong to kill someone but morals dictate that their was no other way unless the murder happened. One may argue that Dudley and Stephen were not in the wrong or vice-versa. In my eyes though the pair was in the wrong. They killed and eat someone who wanted to live despite his I'll state. Now, if Brooks had lost and sacrificed his body as a meal then that would be a different story. It still would be a murder but all three members agreed to it. This scenario did not occur and so the pair of Dudley and Stephen are morally wrong for committing

Based on the evidence, Walter Sobchak should be charged under New York Penal Law 125.25, which is murder in the second degree. Upon seeing is wife Meara Ramos, in bed with James P. Sullivan, Sobchak makes the conscious decision to pick up his firearm, a deadly weapon and shoot it at Sullivan which reveals his intent to cause the death of another person. Unfortunately, the bullet ultimately travels outside, hitting and killing Edward Vedder; an innocent bystander. In his attempt to murder Sullivan; Sobchak, causes the death of a third person. By picking up the gun and firing it, Sobchak recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person, and although it does not harm Sullivan, the intended victim it does cause the death of another person. Under these circumstances Sobchak, is wholly responsible for the death of Vedder and liable under 125.25.

In conclusion Adnan is innocent the so called evidence is not strong enough to go against him. Even though Adnan seems guilty he shows his ultimate innocence because after 17 years he has not said he is guilty. I think the thing i learned about this project is evidence is the key to everything if you can't prove something what good would it do you sure they might believe you you have to show them for they could believe you even more. This concludes what i think about the serial podcast.

In conclusion, The People of Missouri bring the charges of 2nd Degree Murder, Endangering the welfare of a child, and Armed Criminal Action against Mr. Merridew. As previously stated, he participated in the murder of Simon, as well as the wielding of a spear with the intent to commit some sort of a crime using it, and the general lack of concern for the wellbeing of the other children on the island; these crucial details The State believes should be enough to charge him with the aforementioned crimes, and establish justice for the victims, once and for

So you have broken the law, whether or not you had a warrant for your arrest, or not, and now you have to stand trial. During this time, you may be wondering what’s ahead on your journey to being found innocent or guilty. There are many different things that you will have to endure, and it may be a long process. Today, I will be writing about the steps from the time you have your initial appearance until the time the judge gives the verdict on whether or not you are found guilty.

The First Appearance- this is the step where someone is brought before the judge and the defendant is informed of the charges that against him or her, rights advisement, right to have a lawyer or if they can’t afford one , then they have one chosen to represent them, and if possible have the right for bail. This pretrial activity takes place in a magistrate court. Probable cause determination is when a judicial officer will look and check police documents and make sure they obtained reasonable evidence that can be supported in the cause of the arrest. If probable cause is not presented in the court then the defendant is released. Probable cause determination is a key part in the first appearance.

“…and on the charge that the prisoner did with others to conspire to destroy the lives of soldiers in the military service of the United States in violation of the laws and customs of war-Guilty” were the words that soared out of Wallace’s mouth at the end of the trial. It was then that Henry Wirz was found guilty. Why? Why was he found guilty? This decision was based on the emotional aspect of the witnesses, and not by the actual guilt. Not only my defense, but also the defense of Wirz’s attorney, Baker, the testimony of the defendant, Henry Wirz, shows that Wirz should not have been found guilty.

After listening to the Serial podcast it's concluded as being a mystery. It actually is easy to determine that Adnan Sayed is guilty if you go over the facts. Firstly, Jay’s testimony is the most solid piece of evidence against Adnan. The podcast tries to discredit it. Theres the state’s argument that Adnan is a sociopath. There are people who say he was a nice guy. They don’t know Adnan personally and are likely being manipulated. Even if you assume he is guilty you would have to assume that Jay is lying and lots of other things. According to some simple logic, it’s clear he is guilty.

On November 2, 2000 Erma Stewart was arrested along with twenty six others because authorities were under the suspicion that they had been involved with the distribution of an illegal substance. Stewart was jailed and had her bond set to $70,000. She was then appointed a public defender to handle her case. However, Stewart claims that the attorney pressured her into pleading guilty despite her insistence that she was innocent. After spending a month in jail with the knowledge that her children had no to look after them, due to her being a single parent, Stewart conceded and plead guilty to the charges. She was made to pay a fine of $1,000 and was sentenced to 10 years of probation.

1. Slash, the victim, is part of the prosecution against the alleged crimes done by the accused Dr.Nick and Mr. Lance. Slash is a 17 year old male, therefore according to Queensland jurisdiction, he is classified as a child. Slash has obtained forms of body modification from the defendants while his parents were away on an overseas holidays. Slash’s older brother Edge, who is a 20 year old male, has been brought as a witness to the prosecution. Thus, the responsibility of the prosecution is to then prove that the crimes by the accused were committed and establish the onus of proof. To prove the defendants intentions, the mens rea (mental state) and actus rea (physical act) must be found. It is then jury’s duty in the court to give the verdict to the defendants as guilty, as proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The Judge of

The strength of my case from the prosecution stand point will be the evidence and information, that’s good proof to prosecute the suspect that they believe commit the crime. Also, the toxic relationship between the suspect and victim plays a big role in why the prosecutor wants to convict the suspect of this crime. When it comes to a murder case, the suspect of the case could be anybody and not just the obvious person that we think like the spouse or partner of the victim. However, with good amount of evidence in a case, tracing the person who committed the crime can be very easy when the evidence is very helpful. In my case, the wife is the main suspect of the crime because of the amount of evidence that was leaked to her. The evidence is

In the end, Captain Vere ended up having him hung as his final punishment, and now we are faced with the question “Was Vere morally right in making his decision?”. I believe that he was completely correct and right in his decision making, and here’s why; One argument as to why he made a

Everyone in the United States have specific rights when they are criminally accused. “I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.” This quote was from Thomas Jefferson. Trial by jury goes along with everyone having rights when they are accused, it is one of the basic things in the bill of rights, that when you are accused, you have the right to a trial by jury. There are many other rights as well.