Judge Laura Turlip 400 Church St. 2nd Floor, Archbald, Pa. 18403 (570) 876-0570 was advised of the identity of Investigator Sean P. Brennan and of the confidential nature and purpose of the interview, Turlip, provided the following information: Turlip worked as in private practice from 2000 until 2005 when she ran for judge. She took office in January 2006 and was reelected in 2012 and her term run until 2018. Turlip recalled the Donna Smargiassi case. She knew Donna and her sister and parents from the area just like she knows Lili Vioncek-Clark and her family. Clark and Turlip have been friends for approximately 5 years.
office did not commit Brady violations because there was not a pattern of violations in that office, there were multiple violations in that D.A. office. In the Concurring Opinion, Scalia said that “the question presented for our review is whether a municipality is liable for a single Brady violation by one of its prosecutors” (Scalia). Similarly, Judge Clarence Thomas also claimed that a single Brady violation done by a single prosecutor cannot establish liability in the Opinion of the Court (Thomas). However, there were multiple prosecutors involved in Connick v. Thompson who withheld evidence. Gary Deegan, a junior prosecutor on the case, confessed to withholding evidence by removing bloodwork from the evidence room (Lithwick).
Khang An Nguyen Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) Essay Stuyvesant’s very own biweekly newspaper, the Spectator, has been publishing a variety of articles since 1915. But is the content of the Spectator protected under the First Amendment? What if a student publishes an article that violates the privacy of certain students? While the First Amendment grants us freedom of speech and of the press, it is different for students in school.
The article was released on May 12, 2004. The article was written for the newspaper that Nigel writes for, Willamette Week (Jaquiss). “For his investigation exposing a former governor 's long concealed sexual misconduct with a 14-year-old girl” (Jaquiss). The investigators mostly interviewed people that had connections to or knew Goldschmidt or the girl, who they referred to as Susan. This was the best way to get opinions and information from lots of different people (Jaquiss).
Finally, in her opposition Byrne contends that there was a special relationship between Hannon and the Co-Owners because: 1) Hannon had formerly served on the Co-Owners’ board (Compl. ¶ 13); and 2) that because he—as well as all unit owners—are members of the Co-Owners, and therefore the Co-Owners are vicariously liable for Hannon’s conduct. (Compl. ¶ 4). Both arguments fail. First Byrne correctly articulates that the relevant question regarding the Co-Owners liability for Hannon’s criminal activity is “whether the person or entity sued had control over the conduct of the third party who caused the harm by virtue of some special relationship.” Warr, 433 Md. at 183 (emphasis added).
Justice Fred Kaufman found in his 1997 report on the commission of inquiry into that wrongful conviction. In the Jessop’s original statement they had arrived home at 4:10 p.m. on October. 3, 1984, and Christine was not home. The focus of the police shifted to Morin, who was the Jessop’s neighbour and lived with his parents. The police discovered that Morin left work at 3:32 p.m. that day and could not have made it home before 4:14 p.m.
4. Defendant is at fault: After understanding how such a remark is false, we can see that Bauer Media is at fault. If they would have done the correct amount of research they would have understood that their information was completely false and would have not said it in their magazine. Their intention in such a matter of declaring something false would then be taken as to arouse attention to themselves and to hurt someone’s
In her article, “Censorship 101,” West crafts her text through numerous court case experience and skill in rhetorical devices as her background expertise is used to her advantage. Sonja West begins her argument with the use of exemplification in a previous court case. The scene is set in 1962, and West garments the introduction with excessive details and biased language as readers quickly root for the victory of the Tinker case and share the celebratory state of their
Additionally, the media got into the investigation by asking questions about the events before the murder. The National Enquirer, for instance, took a different angle to investigate the case; however, by doing this, the media almost made it impossible for proper investigations to be held by the criminal justice system. Ogletree Jr. maintains that the press failed terribly by trying to assume what the lawyers or witnesses thought at different times of the trial, which was a fail (Ogletree). Consequently, there should be a level of protection from the media. Public figures should not have their cases aired or followed to prevent tampering of evidence or misconceptions.
The actions of Stephen Glass, a once respected reporter for the New Republic, that made him famous, were also the things that shattered his career. It not only made everyone at the New Republic not trust him, but also the readers who believed his stories. His actions were dishonest, and he knew he was spinning false tales, but wanted to become famous, by manipulating his readers and his coworkers. First off, this young writer had no boundaries when it came to storytelling. Glass would lie about dates, times, names, meetings, etc., all to make a story that would pass the editing process.
Rogers Communication is an impressive Canadian company originated by Ted Rogers. Rogers Communication unusual asset mix brings Canadians families the movies they love, the sports they want, the radio stations that inform their day, their favorite magazines, and an excellent shopping-at-home destination. In 2015, as part of the company’s dedication to improving its customers’ experience, Rogers started offering support twenty-four seven for customers through social media. A few of these social media sites that Rogers Communication is a part of are Facebook, Linden, Twitter, and YouTube. They use these social media sites to the fullest extent possible.
Christopher McCall Laura Retersdorf English 1102 10/12/16 Annotated Bibliography Buchhandler-Raphael, Michal. " Overcriminalizing Speech. " Cardozo Law Review 36.5 (2015): 1667-1737.
In a classic formulation, recently adopted and approved by Geopel J. of Supreme Court of British Columbia, a communication is defamatory if it “tends to harm the reputation of another so as to lower [him, her or it] in the estimation of the community or deter third persons from associating or dealing with them. If the defamatory communication takes a permanent or semi-permanent form – that is, if it is written, or spoken while being recorded or filmed such that it is preserved in some way – then it is libel, and actionable without proof of actual pecuniary loss. If it is some exceptions, only the economic losses that can be proven to have resulted from the false communication can be recovered. Examples:- Capital And Counties Bank vs Henty & Sons :-