Shah Bros. Inc. v United States No. 10-00205 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2013)
Facts
Shah Bros is an importer of a smokeless tobacco product. The company imports a product called gutkha from India. The product was classified by the customs department as snuff. Shah Bros protested this classification and contended that the product should be classified as chewing tobacco. The product was subsequently reclassified by the customs department. The company had sought reclassification of a similar product in the past. The government had agreed to classify the earlier product as chewing tobacco as opposed to snuff. Despite the earlier reclassification, the government did not confess to the current judgement until 2013. After the concession by the government, Shah
…show more content…
In this case the government had agreed to reclassify the product as chewing tobacco rather than snuff. In this case the government had also agreed to refund Shah Bros any extra duty and tax it had paid together with interests that had accrued. In the meantime, Shah Bros had brought another action for improper classification of a similar product it had imported. The new product was similar to the gutkha and was also classified as snuff as opposed to chewing tobacco. In the later case, the government initially refused to reclassify the product. However, the government subsequently classified the product as chewing …show more content…
The lack of a clear law for the classification of the product and the plaintiffs description of the product as ground were the government's reason for claiming reasonable justification. Although this might be correct, it is noteworthy that the customs department had dealt with a similar issue in the previous Shah Bros case. In the earlier case, the government had agreed to properly classify the gutkha as chewing tobacco. The government, however, refused to reclassify the product in the current case despite the product being similar to that in the earlier case. The governments refusal to classify the identical product in the same manner and for similar reasons did not satisfy the requirement of reasonable
Hook. On January 13, 1999, a Baltimore high school student named Hae Min Lee, had been reported missing after school. After three weeks of Hae’s disappearance, her body was later discovered at Leakin Park on February 9, 1999. Three weeks after discovering her body, Hae’s ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed, was arrested for the crime. Adnan Syed claimed that the murder was not his doing, however, his friend Jay says otherwise.
Adnan Syed is a 36 year old who had been convicted of first degree murder at the age of 17 on February 28, 1999. Adnan’s friend Jay Wilds testified that he helped Adnan bury Hae Min Lee’s body back in 1999, but Adnan Syed mentions he had nothing to do with Hae’s death. Adnan was convicted with evidence of his cell phone call logs, Asia’s letters to him, and Jay’s description of the route they took during the day of Hae’s death. Adnan Syed is granted a new trial. Not only has there been mistrials, delay, and not enough evidence but also there has been a conviction towards Adnan resulting with doubt after more than 1 decade later.
Kalief Browder, a 16 year old who was arrested for a robbery he did not commit. He spent three years in jail with no conviction. James Brown an impoverished day laborer, charged with murder and waited eight and a half years for his case to go to trial. Meanwhile waiting for his trial, his alibi witness had died of kidney disease. Kalief nor James could afford bail, so they had to suffer in jail for a crime they did not convict.
In the past, have you ever been accused of something you never did and gotten in trouble for it? For example the old saying “whoever smelt it dealt it” or when one of your siblings does something but blames it on you so that you get in trouble and they don’t. Well this is what happened with Adnan Syed. Adnan was accused of murdering his ex girlfriend Hae Min Lee on January 13, 1999. I think that Adnan is innocent of all these accusations made against him and someone pinned the murder on him so they can get away with the crime that they committed.
Adnan Masud Syed, 19, was convicted of murder that sentenced him in prison for life on June 20, 2000. Mr. Syed was accused of strangling his ex girlfriend, Hae Min Lee, 18, and burying her body in Leakin Park on January 13th, 1999. The body was eventually uncovered and Adnan became the primary suspect after an anonymous call was made to the police a few weeks after the crime to investigate Adnan. The prosecutors had stated that Adnan’s motive of murdering Hae was because he was hurt and outraged when they broke up. To counter, the defense attorney had claimed that Adnan was an average American teen, incapable of murder, and he was an honors student at Woodlawn High School.
Adnan was tried and convicted of a murder based on evidence that was, at points, proven to be misleading or false. The witnesses in the case lied, the timeline the state had was faulty because of its reliance on the cell records, and there are several alibis who say Adnan was not able to commit the crime because he was in other locations. It appears that the state was just trying to pin the crime on anyone they could without looking further into many obvious holes in their understanding of what happened. While it is not entirely clear who killed Hae Min Lee, it is exceedingly clear that there is a minuscule amount of reliable proof that Adnan Syed was the one who killed her and so he should not have been convicted of the crime.
Everything seems to fall into place when the prime suspect of a murder is the ex-boyfriend, but how can he be charged when evidence proves otherwise. On January 13th, 1999 Hae Min Lee was found murdered and buried in a forest, Leakin Park. Hae could have been murdered by many people, but the jury settled on the killer being Hae’s ex-boyfriend, Adnan Syed. Adnan Syed should not have been found guilty under the circumstances of, the motive, unreliable cell phone tower evidence, Asia Mcclain evidence, life after the break up, and Jay’s inconsistencies; therefore he was wrongfully convicted and is innocent. The young couple seemed perfect from the beginning, and no one could ever find a flaw; the reasoning for this murder does not show anything
In today’s modern society, many feel that is okay for a police officer can kill a man armed with a harmful weapon at any cost. On many news channels, there are various amounts of articles and reports about a police officer committing this act. Even though a police officer has the right to take action against an armed man, this could be argued in many circumstances. In the 2013, Sammy Yatim was a young adult with a mental illness and was armed with a weapon on a streetcar in Toronto. Yatim was confronted by Const.
Rashid Ahmed Guided Reflection Questions Opening Questions How did the simulated experience of Rashid Ahmed’s case make you feel? Overall, the simulation case of Mr. Ahmed was a positive experience that makes me feel in control and challenged by the situation. I perform multiple nursing skills and acknowledge acquired during lectures. For example, in reference to fluid, electrolyte, and acid-base balance information, I was able to identify the needs of a dehydrated patient.
Can we truly define racism in such a way that it is all-inclusive and understandable? Ruth Wilson Gilmore gives her definition of racism as the “state-sanctioned or extralegal production and exploitation of group-differentiated vulnerability to premature death in distinct but densely interconnected political geographies”. While this may seem difficult to understand, the best way to grasp her definition is through comparison to a real world situation, such as the infamous Massie rape trial and consequential murder of Joseph Kahahawai. The alleged rape of a white woman in Hawai’i, Thalia Massie, and her family’s murder of native Joseph Kahahawai captured nationwide attention in 1931. Not only does this case show how America’s racial hierarchy
There is no doubt that Kalief Browder needs some type of justice, especially for his family and friends. Kalief Browder was just a 16 year old in the Bronx that was wrongfully accused of a stealing a backpack while he was on probation for a previous petty crime. Therefore, he arrested and when he got the amount of bail he quickly found out that he and his family could not pay for it. After not being able to pay for bail, he was sent to a federal prison named Rikers Island for this petty crime, in which he was never charged with. He was sent to a federal juvenile correction center with a bunch of actual criminals that did more than just be accused of stealing a backpack.
The criminal justice system is meant to protect the innocent, and punish those who are guilty of a crime. However, no system is perfect and as a result, sometimes the innocent become victims of the system that is meant to protect them. How exactly do these innocent people become victims of the system? Sometimes the person gets framed, and the crime scene is staged to point a finger at them. Sometimes, there is no strong evidence against them, yet the use of circumstantial evidence is used by the crown.
medicine for creating a generally good mood and sense of well being”. However, this justification is flawed in that all of these evidence of the “harmlessness” is only provided by the East Indian Company and their doctors that act out of the interests of the company. Therefore, it could not be used as a credible claim to assure the fact that opium is harmless and has not detrimental influences on Chinese smokers. Like the British government and British merchants, the Indian government blamed the Chinese smokers for their addiction to the drug, and if anything, they brought on their own destruction. India, being a British colony and had interests of their own as the government stated that “banning that the growing of Indian poppies will damage
Case Study: Aksa and Shabir Mohammad Monthly Budget for Aksa and Shabir Mohammad______________________ Gross Monthly Income 10 000 Income tax, CPP, EI, pension (3500) Disposable Income 6500 Necessities Student loan payments 800 Rent 1000 Car payments and maintenance 1000 Insurance 600 Cable, internet and phone plans 300 Transit 280
Gazing over control, “who burned cigarette holes in their arms protesting the narcotic tobacco haze of Capitalism,” (line31) considered to be the first significant of a start of a campaign. As followed, Capitalism that brought economic into crisis politically involved of drug trades. Where the risk of the financial occurred was a big impact towards enterprising