Exculpatory evidence

Brady Vs Maryland Brady vs. Maryland was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the prosecution had withheld from the criminal defendant certain evidence. The defendant faced his conviction, arguing it had been contrary to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Maryland prosecuted Brady and a companion, Boblit, for murder. Brady admitted being involved in the murder, but claimed Boblit had done the actual killing. The prosecution had withheld

Mr. Ghomeshi had presented photos, emails and text messages of his sexual encounters to two management people of CBC, to show and prove that everything was done with consent. After the CBC management reviewed the evidence, they had come to a decision to fire Mr. Ghomeshi due the evidence was not able

Thompson-Cannino was raped in 1984, she identified a man in a police lineup and in court as her attacker. The detective conducting the lineup told Jennifer that she had done great, confirming that she had chosen the suspect. Eleven years later, DNA evidence proved that the suspect, Ronald Cotton, had been wrongfully convicted of the rape. A man named Bobby Poole, who Thompson testified she had never seen before, was the man who actually raped her. Ronald and Jennifer's book, picking cotton, portrays

make the decision of whether evidence is relevant and reliable. There is great concern surrounding the quality of our forensic science system. However, the courts continue to rely on forensic evidence without having a full understanding on the limitations of certain forensic science disciplines. There are rules that govern the admissibility of forensic science in court. In the case, Bloodsworth v. State of Maryland, these rules were not followed and the forensic evidence presented should not have

burden of proof. The legal burden may be defined as the obligation imposed on a party by a rule of law to prove a fact in issue. Generally the claimant will bear the legal burden of proving each element of his claim, in which he has to present his evidence first. Thus, the claimant can only discharge his legal burden of proof once the defendant has presented his case. However, the claimant will not know if they have been successful in discharging the legal burden until the judge has given the judgement

Article 9.3 – What counts as inability to perform? A promisor’s absence of readiness or willingness to perform amounts to an inability to perform the contract if the promisor was wholly and finally disabled from performing the contract when the promisee terminated the performance. In order to establish repudiation by factual inability, the promisee must prove that the promisor was wholly and finally disabled from performing the contract at the time of termination at the time when performance was

In her article “The Tethered Generation” for HR Magazine in May 2007, freelance writer Kathryn Tyler asserts that due to the fact that millennials grew up with new technologies such as the cell phone and internet, many of the skills they need to integrate into the workforce is severely lacking. She goes on to support this argument by addressing millennial connectivity and helicopter parents. With Tyler’s background in human resources and training and her proclamation of being member of generation

scientific evidence proved that Penta did not have any health benefits superior to those of ordinary water (Gleick 129). Barnett incorporates a qualifier which states that it is difficult to conclude whether bottled or tap water is healthier. However, this does not take away from the fact that the EPA, which regulates municipal water, is more strict than the FDA is with regulation over bottled water. Bottled water companies claim they intensely purify their products despite this evidence. These seemingly

purpose of the Statute is evidentiary, to require reliable evidence of the existence and terms of the contract.” Sterling v. Taylor, 152 P.3d 425, 433 (Cal. 2007). “A memorandum of a contract for the sale of real property must identify the buyer, seller, price, and the property,” or a “means or key by which,” the property can be identified. Id. at 429; Dennis v.

This will generates more punishment to the ghost, making him to have more chances to go hell. As this doubt came to my attention, it came to Hamlet's reflection too. Therefore this doubt causes Hamlet to delay in taking action since he needs more evidence to prove the ghost's words. The Ghost's accusations increase Hamlet's dilemma, since one of his main concerns is the afterlife of Claudius. After proving Hamlet that Claudius is a murderer, the prince delays in getting revenge against his uncle