Despite the fact that Tybalt initiated the fight, Romeo did kill Tybalt with no need for self-defense. Although killing Tybalt was Romeo's intentions at the moment, his actions were not premeditated. California’s penal code 192 states that voluntary manslaughter is an unlawful killing of a human being without malice, the offense is lessened from murder to manslaughter because of actions occurring in a heat of passion. He shall be sentenced to three, six, or eleven years in prison. I know
Ronald Carlson wanted nothing more but justice for his sister who had been murdered. Ronald talks about how he would have killed the man with his own hands if he would have gotten the chance but his mind quickly changed after he seen his sister's murder being executed, he has a new view on the situation now. He talks about how watching the execution left him full of horror and emptiness. Ronald asks a question that should be addressed he said, “Our justice system should not be dictated by vengeance.” He asked, “As a society, shouldn’t we be more civilized than the murderers we condemn?” We should be more civilized, we shouldn't have the right to sentence people to death for three reasons, it puts innocent lives at risk, it's extremely costly
In the eyes of Danforth people are not innocent until proven guilty; they are innocent until accused guilty. In the eyes of Danforth facts and details mean nothing to him. He comes to conclusions that any rational man cannot come to. He has doomed people to death who were innocent just because they did not want to confess to something that they did not do. This is because Danforth’s rule throughout these trials were that if someone was accused of witchcraft, even if they were innocent they had to confess or they were sentenced to death.
Describe/define the Rational Choice Theory and how it relates to Gary Ridgeway. The Rational Choice Theory is a view that crime is a function of a decision-making process in which the potential offender weighs the potential costs and benefits of an illegal act. (Criminology the Core pgs 92-116 ) Gary made several decisions while he was committing murders that showed that he weighed the potential costs and benefits of killing. Gary showed he did not want to get caught by carefully deciding who his victims were going to be. Gary stated in the prosecutor’s summary of the evidence that he had the urge to kill his third wife but he did not because the risk of getting caught was too great.
Spectator refers to when somebody assassin 's another person, the right discipline isn 't to kill him or her. We don 't take from robbers, or assault the attackers. It would seem to excuse the wrongdoing by restating it. While the death penalty removes the main point from the victims and spotlights
The Double Jeopardy clause in the Fifth Amendment protects people from being tried for the same case multiple times. An example of this is if someone is being tried for murder and is found not guilty by a jury, that person cannot be tried again with a different jury until they are found guilty. In the film Double Jeopardy they set the precedence that if Libby kills her husband at the end of the movie, she couldn't be charged with murder because she had previously been tried and convicted of his death. Unfortunately the double jeopardy clause would not protect her. Not only was this murder in a different time and place, but upon the investigation of the murder she would have been released of her previous murder charges and tried again for the
The use of this figurative language made this argument more strong, clear, and understandable. My position on death penalty is that criminals who have committed deadly multiple homicides should be executed if there is enough evidence against them, making sure that no innocent people are punished. Yes, the the article had strengthen my position that innocent people should not be punished. Death penalty should be given only if the defendant murdered two or more people and it should not be a sentencing option when only eyewitness evidence
When Libby is released from jail her soul mission is to kill her husband and take revenge all within protection of the “Double-Jeopardy” clause of the 5th amendment of the Constitution. I do not believe the “Double-Jeopardy” clause would apply for this circumstance. I take this stance because if Libby killed her husband in broad daylight she would be committing a different crime. The crime committed on the boat and the one committed in broad daylight (if she would have killed him) would be two separate crimes therefore the “Double-Jeopardy” clause would not be applicable. The clause states that you cannot be convicted for the same crime twice.
Vigilantism is justice taken upon those who did wrong by someone other than law enforcement. Agatha Christie uses vigilantism in ATTWN to showcase the deception found in her story. An example of vigilantism in ATTWN, is when Justice Wargrave took the law into his hands and decided be the judge, jury, and executioner. I believe this because the author wrote” I was restrained and hampered by my innate sense of justice. The innocent must not suffer.” (Christie) An example of vigilantism in Man Accused in Vigilante Case Charged With Murder is “Police also say Hernandez remorsefully admitted to the shooting, saying he only wanted to make a citizen 's arrest.” (Trujillo) These vigilantes are similar because they both believe in their own way they
Use of excessive force leads to the death of the citizen. Later, the trial goes to court as a partial case and authorities plead not guilty. In defense of authorities’ improper police procedures, the authorities commonly claim that their life was in danger or saw the unarmed victim reach for a weapon. Without sufficient evidence, authorities are capable of breaking free from murder charges. Body cameras are the solution to insufficient evidence of police brutality cases.
Death Qualification: Choosing Jury in Death Penalty Cases Death qualification is a process unique to capital trials in which prospective jurors are questioned about their beliefs regarding the death penalty. Courts can eliminate potential jurors who are not willing to vote for the death penalty in a capital case. If the judge believes that a juror 's feelings about the death penalty would impair his or her ability to judge the case and choose the punishment fairly, that juror will be dismissed "for cause." There is an unlimited number of "for cause" challenges and typically all jurors who say that they oppose the death penalty are excluded. Jurors who are not eliminated by the judge "for cause" because of their death penalty views can be eliminated
Even if she wasn’t seen killing her husband in the beginning, in the eyes of the law, the evidence showed she did. So killing her husband in the end is the same crime. Simple, yeah? Some reasons why I could see the clause not working are because the husband is assuming a different
Murdering or sentencing one to death row is not just, even if the individual is guilty of treason. By saying the individual on trial shall not live because they murdered another, this reflects back on the decision makers. It deems those making the decisions hypocrites. The court members are choosing whether one lives or dies, and if they choose the death option they are performing the exact crime the individual could be on trial for. Murder.