Eyewitness identifications can ruin the lives of innocent people and cause them to live their life behind bars for a crime they didn’t commit. Eye witness testimonies can be the deciding factor for a criminal trial, but the the reliability of the eye witness testimonies is not always as accurate as we assume. Although eyewitness identifications can be very beneficial in solving a case, there have been countless instances where the eyewitness identification has been incorrect due to multiple psychological factors. Memory is the most important aspect to eyewitness identifications because it is the sole tool for remembering details of a specific event, but memory is very complex and has many different aspects that can cause for unreliable
Jay Wilders played his case well enough that he was not put in prison, but Adnan couldn’t say the same. Adnan must have been one unlucky of a person. It does seem in some parts of the case Adnan did some pretty strange things. Jay’s constant changing of his story should have been taken into consideration a little more though. There is a lot of “what if” or “maybe this happened” on the story that makes a difficult end result of figuring out who actually did the murder.
Right after agreeing with Bree’s argument about prostitution and sexually slavery Bob then goes on to state “ You ask me, whoever these shooters are they’re doing the world a favour getting the defects out of the gene pool “ ( Patterson 193 ). This particular conflict has been debated for many years in the real world and it has to do with the fate of criminals who produce drives and kill others. At one point, most countries had a form of capital punishment for violent criminals but now since it is viewed as inhumane only a few of countries do to this day. This comment sets up another conflict in Alex’s head for whether he agrees with it or not. At first he thinks “ I don’t care if you believe in Jesus, God, Allah.
This is often because judges disallow the mention of jury nullification in their courtrooms. This is because some judges and other actioners of the law find the concept to be “a gut-punch to Democracy” and an “invitation to anarchy”. The concept is thought to be a violation of the justice system, and, as a result, some judges choose to execute their right to not inform the jury of their right to nullification. Often, jurors find out about jury nullification through their own research or prior knowledge of the practice. The concept of jury nullification is also gaining a lot of traction in modern media.
There is much debate over whether child soldiers should be allowed into the US. Child soldiers are victims of war and all that goes with it. Therefore, they should be given amnesty. Many children are forced to fight and serve against their will. “Human-rights experts estimate that more than 2000,000 children worldwide are still being used as combatants, usually against their will….
He tried to support the idea that there’s something about slum kids and they are rotten. See Ed’s explanation was not as good as the other guy who stated that the female eye witness had poor eyesight and therefore could of made a mistake in identifying the boy. When they voted again there was one more voting for the boy not being guilty they assumed jack changed his vote because he came from same community bias. Jack did not change his vote it turned out it was the old guy who has wisdom. At one point in the video the angry man said I’m going to kill you!
Many news stories, reports, and books fairly describe wrongful convictions in detail, although not all of these wrongful convictions resulted in formal exonerations. Most witness misidentifications were made in good faith with the witness attempting to help officials find the real perpetrator of a crime, although this explanation does not examine the conditions under which these identifications were made. Some of the conditions that need to be taken into account are whether a photo was shown to a victim by the police before a lineup, whether the identification by the witness was hesitant, or if the victim was urged to be positive when testifying. Additionally, was the identification from the same race; was there prejudice, how much distance and duration of interaction was there between victim and suspect prior to identification and what were the viewing conditions; darkness or day light? With so many factors involved, it should be obvious to some why eye-witness misidentification can happen so frequently.
"While I do believe being tough on crime is a good thing in general, it's the role of the judge to determine it." Mandatory minimum sentences often tie a judge's hands, robbing them of their right to tailor sentences to a specific situation. I suppose tough-on-crime laws “worked" if success is only measured by the increase of prisoner populations. However, one of the unbelievable little details of this new tough-on-crime stance is how differently the federal government views crack cocaine and powder cocaine. I am thankfully not an expert on cocaine or its use, but a cursory Google search tells me that crack cocaine is just powder cocaine mixed with baking soda.
It depicted his own fate when people judged him on his skin color. He was beyond innocent in the case but, convicted anyway, the jury didn’t care about the lack of evidence they were determined to send him to jail. Due to the time period people often discriminated against black not just judged them. If Tom Robinson was white there wouldn’t have been a case in the first place. Tom had a re-trailing coming up but he knew there was no way that a jury would say he was innocent, so Tom made his decision and tried to escape from jail and ended up getting shot.
He has a very good chance of winning the trial because the prosecution "has not produced…medical evidence…that the crime…took place" (Lee 271). With the overwhelming evidence that the defense has provided the jury has no valid reason to convict Tom Robinson. However, racism directly influences the jury to have bias against him. Another key contributing factor in the