All rise for the honorary Judge Briskey.
Please be seated. Mr. Montresor you are being charged with 1st degree murder of Fortunato due to the confession made to Mark Heyer about the murder how do you plea.
Not guilty your honor. Very well the prosecution may proceed with their opening statement and i advise the jury to pay close attention to detail to determine the right judgement of this man. The prosecution may proceed.
Mr. Montresor according to Mark you expressed everything that happened that night in full detail about killing Fortunato. The prosecution calls Mark to the stand. Mr. Heyer please explain to the court what Mr. Montresor told you about killing Fortunato. Well… um he told me he locked him up in the tombs of the Montresor’s
…show more content…
Montresor was mentally ill at the time the murder was committed but I believe this to be false according to the previous statement said by Mr. Heyer claiming that Montresor felt guilt and remorse after starting to fill up the hole with bricks. If his client was mentally ill he would not have felt any sadness about building the wall around the entrance to the catacomb room, locking his friend away to die from starvation. He was prepared for this murder the entire time, having everything ready the moment he would step foot in the tomb. “ In its surface were two iron staples, distant from each other about two feet, horizontally.” That is all your honor. The jury shall now leave to make their decision, I encourage the jury to think hard about their choice in order to decide the right choice for this man. “Jury leaves the …show more content…
We have your honor we find the defendant guilty of First Degree Murder. Mr. Montresor I hope you had a wonderful life because as of now you will be spending life in jail without parole. There is no one else but to blame expect you. All rise for the honorary Judge Briskey. “ Judge Briskey leaves the room.” Mr. Montresor would go to live the next ten years in Verona Maximum Security Prison before dying of aids he got from a blood transfusion after an inmate cut his arm with a shank. Mr. Montresor has been asked multiple times afterwards if he regrets killing his friend and every time he responds with the same answer.
He stated, “When I arrived at the scene I noticed that patrons were quickly leaving the restaurant. Once inside I could see that they were clearly shaken. As I scanned the room I noticed a body lying on the floor near the back.” McCormick later states that he was “unable to revive the victim. He had no pulse and had already lost a substantial amount of blood.”
Denis O’ Connor Catholic High School RPT #2 Ethan Raphael B. Bautista Mr. Orsag March 30, 2015 Steven Truscott Steven Truscott was accused with the murder of Lynne Harper in 1959. Lynne Harper was his classmate during middle school.
This proceeding, reference number: t16781211e-23 on December 11, 1678 has two offenders named Nathaniel Russell and John Watson. These two men are being prosecuted for the killing of William Midgley. Both William and Midgley pleaded not guilty in the accounts of murder. They are accused of giving Midgley a “mortal wound on his breast” from which he died days later. There are three witnesses who include: Dorothy Midgley, sister to William Midgley, Elizabeth Symmonds, and Rebeccah Niccols.
After the witness declared, Mors politely confessed to the officer he had killed eight residents of the old peoples home were he worked at as a nursing assistant. He initiated he used arsenic, opium, and morphine to poison his victims and decided afterwards to devise another method that was less likely to leave any evidence. His new method was to pour chloroform into his victims mouth and when burn marks around Mors victims mouth would appear he would use a layer of Vaseline to prevent it. It was not long as Mors continued to get away with his murders until elderly patients and even some staff had about Mors to the police.
As a juror, you must render a verdict of guilty or not guilty, and follow the law and do so based on your opinion from the evidence that has presented in court over the last several weeks on the case of Valentine Shortis (Friedland, 1986). After going over my notes from the trial numerous times, the verdict that I have chosen to write down on my ballot is “not guilty.” As a reader, you might not comprehend my reasoning for this vote that goes against all the odds of what the Crown has been trying to persuade me not to consider. I have analyzed all the evidence, and in my opinion, I believe that Valentine Shortis is an insane man, and has suffered from a disease of the mind since childhood. On the night of March 1st 1895, Valentine Shortis
Sanely Guilty - Indeed There has been a tragic death befall this town - the murder of Mr. Johnson - and today, the task at hand for the judge and jury is to decide the state of mind of Mr. Smith at the time of the murder of Mr. Johnson. There is absolutely no question that Mr. Smith murdered Mr. Johnson; Mr. Smith admitted to two policers: “I admit the deed!” (61). Mr. Smith further directed the police officers to the location of the body when he demanded they “ . . . tear up the planks!
The defendant is pronounced guilty. Those were the words that Adnan’s Syed’s heard as he was being convicted of first-degree murder of his ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee on Jun. 6 . 2000. The case aroused after the murder of Ms.Lee on Jan. 13 1999. Jay Wilds, a former friend of Mr.Syed had agreed to be interviewed by the authorities for immunity, leading to the state of Maryland building a case against Mr.Syed and leading to his eventual sentencing. After 15 years, journalist Sarah Koenig starts the podcast Serial investigating the murder of Ms.Lee under the notion that there could be a possible mistrial and has now resulted in a retrial.
Georgie Milton did something not many people have the guts to do, he took the life of his best friend to save him from the torture that awaited him, but, he took the life of another man and he took this life with the intention of murder. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, there is no difference between euthanasia and murder; and to this indictment, George Milton has pleaded not guilty. If I am to prove him otherwise, you must find him so. Lennie Small has been described to us as a caring giant. He had no bad intentions; and it is fair to say that our witnesses have provided us with sufficient evidence to support my argument.
Elmore’s case has every indicator used for the debate over capital punishment, it had issue about: “race, mental retardation, bad trail lawyers, prosecutorial misconduct, ‘snitch’ testimony, DNA testing, a claim of innocence.” (p. xiv) lead to Bonner’s in-depth investigation into Elmore’s case and to his desire to share Elmore’s story. Anatomy of Injustice: A Murder Case Gone Wrong, Bonner uses his vast knowledge of the legal system, his gift of storytelling and his phenomenal writing skills to entice readers into wanting to know more, and asking many question on who, and how thing where done. Bonner places a lot of emphasis the issue of race, poor police investigation, mental retardation, and the lack of ethics of defense lawyers, and the injustice of the police and the inter legal system. Bonner places emphasis on the following
Moreover, when everyone decided that the boy is guilty, he suggested that they should talk about it first. Furthermore, he said that he didn 't
Relationships, lies, murder, conviction. These are all aspects that come into play when talking about the January 13th, 1999 murder of high school student Hae Min Lee. Adnan Syed, Hae’s 17-year-old ex-boyfriend was convicted of her murder in 2000. The problem with this is that the only evidence the state had to convict Adnan was the stories told by others, specifically someone named Jay who was with Adnan for some of the day Hae went missing and had possession of Adnan’s car and cell phone. He claims Adnan made him come pick him up after the murder was committed and assist him in burying Hae’s body.
The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar
After a lengthy and tiresome trial a murderer finally receives his verdict. The notorious serial killer who murdered thirty-nine people over a span of one year earns life imprisonment. Joyfully, the spectators exit courthouse’s grand doors, celebrating, cheering, and clapping. Each one chants “justice is alive,” for this evil man finally received punishment for the crimes he committed. However, a young man overlooking the joyous crowd thinks to himself: “Justice was undoubtedly served today.
First, Hatchett was convicted from the testimony of a witness. Gerard Williams testified and identified Hatchett as the man he saw swinging at the victim. From this single testimony, Hatchett was found guilty of second degree murder and sentenced to 25-years-to-life. The second reason the trial led to the conviction was because of something Mr. Hatchett’s lawyers did not do. Neither of Hatchett’s crutches and wearing a leg cast and was physically unable to commit the crime.
Anthony Hinton spoke to us about his time on death row, and the events leading up to arrest, conviction, and being exonerated. He was there to inform us on his experience and the injustice that can come with the death penalty. This eventually leads to him trying to persuade the audience to take action to get rid of the death penalty. As a strong believer of the death penalty, Hinton’s