Victims’ Rights in Liberal and Conservative States Hawaii and Tennessee are liberal and conservative states respectively because the former has a strong stand on equity among individuals while the later strongly believes in good morals. The criminal victims’ rights were founded in the 1970s due to victim marginalization that existed for a long period (Caplan 224). Montaldo argues that all the fifty states have rules to protect victims during the trial process (“How to Write” 2). These rights ensure the victims are treated fairly during the prosecution process. The criminal victims’ rights of these two states have both similarities and differences, and the states consider themselves liberal and conservative respectively due to their different belief in the role of the government. …show more content…
Firstly, victims in both states have the right to protection against threats, abuse, intimidations and other forms of harassment from the offenders who scare the victims as a trick to make them drop the cases. According to Montaldo, some criminals may yawm laudly, make sarcastic faces, laugh, and make obscene gestures as a way of harassing victims (“Tennessee” 14). However, the victims are considered the first priority as far as this protection is concerned. Secondly, victims have the right to be informed of all court proceedings in the two states. Necessary information includes rescheduling of a court hearing and final disposition of the case. These two states also grant the victims the right to safe waiting areas during the prosecution period. These areas must guarantee the victims a distance from the offenders and their close associates such as family and friends. Evidently, the legislation of these two states is similar in some ways despite one being liberal and the other a conservative
Introduction The book that I selected is called “Getting Life” by Michael Morton, who is a man that was wrongfully convicted of killing his wife in Texas in 1986. This book takes us from a happy young couple to the day of the murder, through the investigation into his wife’s murder, Michael’s trial and conviction, 25 years in prison, appeals, release from prison, and reintegration into society. One unique fact about this case is that is the first case where the prosecutor in a wrongful conviction case was subsequently convicted of prosecutorial misconduct, stripped of their law license and sentenced to serve time in jail.
The cases of The Town of Castle Rock v. Jessica Gonzales and Jessica Lenahan (Gonzales) v. United States of America were the result of a tragedy that could have easily been prevented. These cases bring into question: when is discretion appropriate, what is property, what rights are we guaranteed, and what can we do about it? Simon and Jessica Gonzales were married in 1990. Ms. Gonzales alleges that her husband became abusive toward her and her three daughters, Leslie, Katheryn and Rebecca, around 1996.
Crime victim compensation is a government program to reimburse victims of violent crimes- such as assault, homicide, rape, and, in some states, burglary - as well as their families for many of their out-of-pocket expenses. Every state has a crime victim compensation program. Crime victim compensation programs have a maximum that will be paid for each claim, which varies from state to state and can range from $10,000 to $100,000. They also have limits on certain types of expenses, for example, limits on the amounts that can be paid for funeral or burial expenses, for counseling, or for medical expenses. Because it may take several weeks or months to process a claim for crime victim compensation, many states offer emergency awards, which are
This posed two main Constitutional questions: Do non-capital felony defendants still get the sixth amendment?s right to counsel in state courts? Should all states have to provide counsel in their courts for indigent defendants just as federal courts do, no matter what type of case it may be? (Street Law, 2012) The case of Gideon v. Wainwright helped bring into light and define the full rights of the accused. Through dealing with the sixth amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, it focused on the key aspect of appointing counsel for any defendant, and made one way our country handles criminal justice synonymous between state and federal
In the case of Tara Brown’s murder, various groups of individuals are affected. As well as maintaining principles of fair punishment and deterrence, the criminal justice system has to consider perceptions of the victim’s family (secondary victim), the community’s demand for crime prevention, and the offender’s rights to a fair court hearing. The most likely outcome is imprisonment for Lionel John Patea due to committing an indictable offence. It is important to note that if this was only a case of domestic abuse without murder, it would utilise more time, effort and expenses to come to a resolution. This is due to the different circumstances and degree of abuse that the judge has to assess.
One of the most recent controversial topics sweeping the nation is on the topic of police brutality. Victims of police abuse tend to state that their rights had been violated. As a result, usually if there had been a violation of an individual’s rights, then the evidence seized by the police against that person becomes admissible. However, the idea of punishment for police officers who violate the rights of the people was never implemented into the Constitution. This concept was created by the Supreme Court through many cases.
The united states is one of the most empowered country’s from our economy, to our military, but like every other country we have our flaws. Our flaws are found in our judicial system. You can witness these flaws by watching the HBO series paradise lost, a documentary about the West Memphis three, a brutal killing of three West Memphis boys. This court case shows many flaws from the bias to the actual evidence the prosecution shows.
In the history of the United States of America, there have been many situations in which a trial was unfair, both in the cases of state and federal indictments. However, none of these have measured up to the outrageous inequity and negligence by the Alabama legal system in 1930. This poses the question: to what extent did the Scottsboro Trial reveal the faults of the U.S. Judicial System? Going so far to tie back to the Constitution, the Scottsboro Trial violated many rights of these boys, regardless of race; even the judges and prosecution put the system to shame. Aside from years of trial, falsely incriminating evidence, and biased courts, the Scottsboro boys faced years of judges, prosecutors, and mobs trespassing on their basic human rights.
Thesis: The state of Florida Stand your ground laws give the impression set against the minority, benefit the majority and exhibit loopholes that leaves the innocent without life. A. Stand your ground law was first pass in Florida were homicide is at its worst. B. The Stand your ground law set a pattern of allowing the guilty to be innocent and the innocent to be guilty. C. Shoot now and ask Question latter is not a peaceful answer to the problem in an environment with principles and laws that will protect the human race.
Lawyers also decide what is relevant in court, rather than letting parties decide what they believe to be relevant. Because of this, victims lose participation in their own case. Christie also discusses the types of segmentation and their effects on modern law. I agree with Christie’s views of modern law in regards to reduced participation of parties, the presence of too many specialists, and his view on segmentation. I agree with
Lippman, Matthew. (2017). Essential Criminal Law (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Malani, Anup. (2007)
The victim right’s movement of the 1980’s demonstrated a shift in the Judicial and Law Enforcement practices from Rights of the accused to rights of the victim. The fundamental right of the victim was to be represented equitably throughout the criminal justice process. There are four basic rights of the victims that are the right or information and notification, participation, the right to feel and be reasonably protected and
Should Convicted Felons be Entitled to More Rights? Everyday thousands of individuals are incarcerated into the United States prison system. As soon as these jailed individuals start their term, they give up multiple rights they had prior to being convicted. Each convicted felon is treated the same regardless of the crime they committed and lose the same amount of rights. The amount of constitutional rights taken away from convicted felons should depend on the severity of their crime.
In Bryan Stevenson’s Just Mercy, he writes to illustrate the injustices of the judicial system to its readers. To do so, Stevenson utilizes multiple writing styles that provide variety and helps keep the reader engaged in the topic. Such methods of his include the use of anecdotes from his personal experiences, statistics, and specific facts that apply to cases Stevenson had worked on as well as specific facts that pertain to particular states. The most prominent writing tool that Stevenson included in Just Mercy is the incorporation of anecdotes from cases that he himself had worked on as a nonprofit lawyer defending those who were unrightfully sentenced to die in prison.
Victim witness programs are used by the government in order to provide support and assistance to those who fall victim to a crime. According to Victim Witness Program, the primary goals of such programs, include but are not limited to, encouraging victims to participate in any parole and supervised release processes of their offender, notify and facilitate victims in participation of any hearing or release dates in regards to their offender, provide options for supportive services, and advocate for crime victims (2015, para.1). The organization under which the victim-witness program is located is under a system, which has many internal constituencies, thus creating competing and conflicting purposes. The goals of the victim-witness program are quite simple and seek out to give the victim the right to be represented during the processing of the offender, however, given the multiple roles the court, for example, must serve, the goals of the victim-witness program can be both complex and conflicting.