West Memphis Three Case

The Canadian criminal justice system is often represented by the balanced scales of justice. These scales symbolize the need for the law to be viewed objectively in order to ensure a fair determination of innocence. Ideally, the criminal justice system should incorporate the values of the scales of justice to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate the law (Jordan, 2014). When dealing with crime, this system mainly uses methods of retributive justice in order to achieve its goals. However, despite justice being supposedly impartial, there is an overwhelming amount of injustice in all stages of the criminal justice process, from the charging of the individuals in court to their sentence in prison (Jordan, 2014). To combat this

The justice system is best known as a pursuit for the truth. It is managed by humans so, it is inevitable not to make errors such as ones that will lead an innocent to be wrongfully convicted. Such a scenario is the David Milgaard case where he supposedly raped and murdered a woman named Gail Miller but really, the foundations of justice were tampered with. The Canadian justice system failed terribly, dismissed millions of dollars and banished the citizens certainty in the system. Most importantly, this even diminished 20 years of a man’s life.

Canadian Criminals are a major part of Canadian society. In our country if you were not the direct victim of a crime you tend to forget the members of society that take pleasure in causing societies grief. As in the case of James Hutchinson and Richard Ambrose, whose crimes were committed in December of 1974.1 They were convicted of killing two Moncton City Police officers. Today, years after the murders were committed Ambrose and Hutchinson are still the center of a major controversy that has plagued our parole system. In order to fully understand the controversy that Ambrose and Hutchinson posses you must look at the

In one of the most well known cities of the United States, New York City was the central focus in the 1980’s. Five minority youths aged 14 to 16 were arrested and convicted of rape, sexual assault, and almost murdering 28-year old white female investment banker, Trisha Meili, as she was jogging through Central Park on the night of April 19th, 1989. These innocent Latino and African American five young men— Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson, Raymond Santana, Korey Wise, and Yusef Salaam—were exonerated in 2002 after serving 6-13 years in prison until the condemned murderer, Matias Reyes confessed to the rape of Trisha Meili, where his DNA was discovered to match the evidence

In the book by Sara Burns, The Central Park Five, tells the story of five young men who were incarcerated for the brutal rape and beating of a New York woman. The confession that happened on April 19 1989 forever changed the lives of five innocent teenagers. In the United States of America there is a widespread belief that the alleged criminals are “innocent until

The movie “The Central Park Five” was a documentary film. It is talking about five young men were involved in a rape case. One white woman was raped and left for dead in the central park in 1989. Police officers arrested five fifteen years old suspects. The government did not have enough evidence to judge these five black men and Latino Americans; however, because of the racial discrimination, the justices judged them as guilty and sentenced them to jail about 9 to 15 years. After few months, Matias Reyes confessed to the rape case and the lab test also showed that the sperm was matched. The five teenagers were released after the suspect confessed his crime. Directors of the movie, Ken Burns, Sarah Burns, and David Mcmahon, used

John Williams was recently incarcerated for the violent murder of three young women. Prior to his arrest, police were on edge because the small town in Arkansas had never experienced anything like that before. Each girl was taken within a week from each other, all while they were out after dark taking a short cut home. Sadly they were all found buried deep in the woods after weeks of searching. The town went into shock; citizens were exhibiting both fear and rage for the loss of the precious girls from their community.

The Canadian court system, like anything made by man, has flaws. One of these flaws is the wrongful conviction of many men and women like David Milgaard and Steven Truscott. These innocent men spent years of their life behind bars because of the court system, serving the sentence for a crime they did not commit.

In the case between R. v Maracle, it was about a 14 year old Brantford female was kidnapped at gunpoint by David Maracle on May 26, 1997 and brutally and repeatedly raped. This event had accused on 1997, and then was farther investigated and made its way to court. On November 8, 2000, the trial judge found the appellant to be a dangerous offender and ordered him detained for an indeterminate period. The appellant appeals conviction and sentence. The case was later appealed in 2006. This case took place in superior court of justice. This case took place because the appellant’s conviction and sentence. In this case it shows the dangers so sex offenders and how hard they try to get away with crime that they have committed, even though they left all the proof / evidence behind at the location which was all leading up to them, being the one to frame. (http://www.thespec.com)

I think it is not fair because Blencoe had committed what I think as a serious offence. He may have no sexually assaulted the women, but he still had harassed them. From a women’s point of view being harassed is still a very big issue especially in a work place. The women accusing Blencoe, Ms. Willis and Schell were meant to feel safe and secure in their workplace which clearly did not take place. Blencoe could be a hypocrite in this situation as he is claiming about how his rights were violated, but he violated the women’s rights at the same time. Blencoe went against the law and harassed three women, in which he was not convicted or fined for. I think this is a very wrong decision because every Canadian has a right to feel safe and secure. For example, now that Blencoe is free, he could be harassing more women and doing the same thing again thinking since he has gotten away with it once, he could get away with it again. By not announcing a punishment it somewhat gives the offender more confident since they do not have consequences for it. Also, I feel like Blencoe’s case was somewhat taken more lightly since he was a Cabinet member and a Minister beforehand. He may have gotten away with his sins due to his previous positions making it unfair to actual citizens. Continuing on, I do agree his rights were somewhat violated under section 11 (b). The Commission should not have taken up so much time before

The Association in Defense of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYK) is an important resource for those that need assistance proving their innocence. This foundation is a Canadian, non-profit organization that was founded in 1993 and incorporated in 2000.The goal of the AIDWYK is to “identify, advocate for, and exonerate individuals who have been convicted of a crime they did not commit and to prevent wrongful convictions through legal education and reform.” Without the efforts of this foundation 18 innocent individuals would still be behind bars, and hundreds of cases would

The question that needs to be answered is, does the Youth Criminal Justice Act in Canada properly address the victims' rights, the rights and needs of the young offender, and does it protect public safety? That question is hard to answer, as some people think that the Act is a more decent and humane way to approach young persons in trouble with the law. On the other hand others feel it offers too much protection to those whom least deserve it -- the young offenders, and very little to those who deserve it -- the victims. The Youth Criminal Justice Act should concentrate on making young offenders aware that they will be held responsible and accountable for their behaviour.

Among the many differing cases of wrongfully convicted Canadians, the case of Guy Paul Morin is very interesting. There were many issues that caused an innocent man from Queensville, Ontario to be convicted of the murder of Christine Jessop. We’re going to look at how the police failed to conduct a thorough investigation, how the court system failed, and how cases like this can be preventing in the future.

There was no evidence collected and tested at the crime scene which could have proved who committed the murders. A lieutenant who contacted a juvenile officer in Memphis both agreed that the murders had to have been done by someone in a cult. The juvenile officer quickly knew of someone who was involved in a cult and said this juvenile could be capable of a crime like this. The accused, Damien Echols, was immediately interviewed and asked questions that the police believed no one but the killer would know the answers to. The answers that were given by Damien Echols were known answers throughout the community and this made Damien look guilty. Damien’s appearance was very strange and different and he was not considered “normal” in the communities beliefs. He was considered guilty by his Wiccan beliefs and his gothic appearance. Not only was Damien deemed guilty of this crime, but two other boys were also accused of these murders. There are many inconsistencies with the case. The police did not collect all evidence in the woods that could have been collected to possibly link the murders to someone. According to TruTV Crime Library, there was a boy who claimed he saw who committed the murders. He claimed he even saw men who spoke Spanish commit the murders. He later changed his story and said he saw one of the victim’s fathers killing the three boys. This same boy could not even identify two of the boys

In today’s Canadian society, it is certain that criminal law is to serve and protect and its fundamental purpose is to prevent crime and punish offenders. However, there have been cases where criminal law has punished the offender who turned out to be innocent. A conviction is needed to show that the system is not in disrepute and to keep order and people safe in society. If a criminal cannot be caught then people will look down upon the system in disgrace. In many cases, officers will arrest an individual who fits a certain description that they know will lead to an arrest and conviction. In the case of Guy Paul Morin it shows how the system failed in aiding the innocent who abide to the law. The law is established to protect those who