Within his argument in favor of merging his sentences under the required evidence test, Rivas-Membreno claims that “[w]ith respect to [his] conviction for soliciting witness intimidation, there is simply no evidence to support it.” If the State’s evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction with respect to a particular charge, the proper means of challenging the charge is to make a motion for judgment of acquittal under Md. Rule 4-324. If a defendant fails to move for a judgment of acquittal, or fails to renew his motion at the conclusion of his presentation of evidence, the motion is waived. Md. Rule 4-324(c).
The jurors who were interviewed said there was not enough evidence and if there was it would have change the verdict.Even though the defense of battered women was not acceptable back then if her attorney brought the information about her abuse, even if it might not completely change the outcome at least he could have used as mitigating circumstance. In addition the trial is held by a judge who confuse the battered women syndromes with self-defense. It looks like even if the information about her abuse presented and the battered woman syndrome defence can be used the judge misinterpretation about battered women syndrome would have affect the case and the judgment in negative
They can take away my heart, but I know in my heart that I did not do these alleged acts" (Bohm & Haley, 2014, p.309). He plans to fight and overturn the verdicts. I do not think there is enough evidence to be able to overturn the verdicts. The evidence that was presented was the eight boy’s statements that were testified. One thing that would hold is the cover up that his piers were convicted of dealing with his crime and the juveniles testimonies if they all were similar to Sandusky’s ways to which the jury will be convinced.
At her trail, detective Dennis Chapmen testified that finger prints on a pill bottle found at the crime scene after a level one basic comparison matched her prints. The detective did this despite lacking any training in conducting latent print comparisons. Regardless, he testified anyway. This was the only evidence against Canen and she was convicted and sentenced to 55 years in prison. After the conviction an attorney who believed that Canen was innocent took on the case.
Even in this situation though, Malcolm was wary of Macduff. Being suspicious actually helped both Malcolm and Macduff into seeing the clearer picture. A fairly old case has also been solved due to lack of trust also. “Jack Daniel McCullough, a 75-year-old military veteran and former police officer from Seattle, was convicted in 2012 of the abduction and murder of Maria Ridulph.... A judge hearing the case without a jury found McCullough guilty after a weeklong trial” (O’Neill). Jack McCullough wouldn’t be free if it weren’t for Richard Schmack’s, the state attorney, skepticism of the case.
However, what if it were instead that we accepted a person is "guilty until proven innocent". In this case, we would have to go through every applicable law in the United States and prove that a person has not broken a single one of those laws to be truly innocent. This isn't only unreasonable, but almost impossible to go through every condition necessary to verify that a person is innocent. And with this reasoning, every person in the United States would be classified as "guilty," and we would almost never be able to prove otherwise. This analysis is very similar to how Karl Popper proposes we solve the problem of induction.
He was also given $10,000 in cash which was recorded by Aruban officials. (Wikipedia, n.d.) When official went to locate the body, they realized that Sloot was not being truthful. The location where he said the body was, was not even constructed. For this reason Sloot was charged for extortion and wire fraud in the U.S District court of Northern Alabama. On June 30 he was indicted on the charges.
Well, one way they are connected is because Rosa Parks wouldn’t give her seat up to a white man, in To Kill a Mockingbird Tom Robinson was accused of rapping a white woman which he really didn’t do. Back then everyone was treated differently all the white and black people were separated. When you go one a school bus first 10 rows were saved for the white kids or adults and all the black people had to sit in the back or on the other side of the bus. No matter what the situation was between Rosa Parks and the white man, Rosa Parks was taken to court over her not giving her seat up to a white man. Tom Robinson was taken to court over a white woman accusing him of rapping her, she thought it would be nice to have Tom come over when he would walk by and have him fix something in her house.
Also he had mistaken the dates several times, and wrote March instead of May. The defense attorney, on the other hand, looked very unorganized, and he repeated the same idea over and over again, that it actually resulted in diverting the attention and deemphasizing the main point. The trial was about the man who took the metal scraps that were in possession of a company. The metal scraps were about $500 worth, and the man took them twice without the permission of the owner. The defendant did not testify on the trial but insisted that someone told him that he could take them and that he didn’t know the scraps belonged to the
There is data that has been collected from 2002 to 2015 that reveals how many Black, Latino, and White people in New York that were stopped and frisked. Throughout those 13 years, approximately 5 million were stopped and interrogated and about 9 out of every 10 stopped were innocent. Not only that, but Blacks accounted for roughly 50 percent of those stopped and Latinos made up approximately 30 percent, while Whites made up about 10 percent. (Stop-and-Frisk Data) Since this clearly demonstrates that stopping random people because of “suspicious activity” is ineffective, why keep doing it? Nearly everyone that they stop is innocent and is thus wasting the victim’s time and also the money that funds these stops.