Sloan Jackson's Case Analysis

Once someone steps in the court room to oversee a trial of this caliber (or any caliber) they must not and will not let the media dictate their perspective of events. Scott Peterson’s jury saw the burden of proof provided by the prosecution and were left with no doubt in their minds by their own deductions he was guilty. The Casey Anthony jury on the other hand took all of the evidence into consideration, but they still were not completely convinced she was capable of the charges being filed against her, leaving them no other decision but to provide a not guilty

A violation of this statute can result up to $100,000,000 in fines for a

At the age of 19, Gregory Parsons life took a dramatic turn by a shocking miscarriage of justice. On February 15, 1994, he was convicted in Newfoundland, of the second-degree murder of his mother Catherine Carroll, and was sentenced to life in prison with no chsnce of parole for 15 years. Parsons’ conviction was based on circumstantial evidence, and his case was closed by the Crown prosecutor just by simply asking the jury,”If Greg Parsons didn’t cause his mother’s death[,] who did?”

When asked why he voted not guilty, juror eight stated “Look, this boy has been kicked around all his life. You know---living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a year in and a half in an orphanage while his father served a jail term for forgery. That’s not a very good head start. He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years.

In regards to the Brent Small case, I personally believe that Mr. Smalls shouldn't be found guilty due to the lack of evidence. Although there was a witness who saw what happened, the evidence isn’t consistent with the case. The vehicle did match the description but the witness was unsure of the license plate and the damage to the vehicle isn’t significant to the crime committed. I don't believe that the evidence is strong enough to convict Mr. Smalls.

Juror 8 took it into his own hands to prove the prosecution wrong and purchase the same knife at a

Think about how often people get arrested and how often trials are held every year, let alone everyday. Oftentimes, innocent people are accused and charged for a crime that wasn’t there fault. This was the case for Adnan Syed, an innocent guy who was put in jail for a murder case. On January 13, 1999, Hae Min Lee was murdered at the age of 17. The evidence for this case was very unexplainable, but of course, the state went after Hae’s ex-boyfriend Adnan who really had nothing to do with the murder.

The Civil Rights Movement happened because the African American citizens finally stood and fought for their rights. The Civil Rights Movement took place in the 1960s when many cases were brought up to the Supreme Court that led to desegregating a place or even an action. One of the most important cases was the Bailey v. Patterson case. The case’s hearing, Bailey v. Patterson case, took place on February 26th, 1962 which gave the Civil Rights Movement a huge boost. (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com)The Bailey v. Patterson case was between Samuel Bailey and a Mississippi general attorney.

One piece of evidence that proves the boy’s innocence is the uncommon kind of knife. The testimony said that it was one of a kind knife, while juror number eight brought the exact same one in a local pawn shop proving that the knife wasn’t that rare. In addition to the not uncommon knife, we also have

You Will Be The Judge Facts: The case involves a 12 year old child named Griffin Grimbly who told the teacher that he was beaten with a clothesline by his father Mr.Gimli. In court, the Mr.Gimli argued that he was devoted to Christian and was following the Biblical injunction on child rearing, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, as well as arguing that s 43 of the criminal code gives parents the right to use “reasonable force” in disciplining their children. Issue: Is Mr. Grimbly is guilty of or not guilty of assault ? Held: Mr.Grimbly is guilty of assault.

All the jurors except Juror 3 had been convinced he was no longer guilty, even though the evidence displays it as such. After much debate juror number three says,”All right. ‘Not guilty’ ”(72). All the testimonies and evidence given by the court had been proven wrong by the jury. This shows major flaws in the justice system and it shows how reasonable doubt is found.

but Juror number ten said otherwise. The evidence that is shown to prove this point is when all the jurors are all at the table and they all go to the window and turn their backs towards juror number ten, specifically juror numbers three and four. This happened while the vote was nine to three, nine voted innocent and three voted guilty. Three and four turned their backs towards number ten because they disagreed on why they thought the boy was guilty. Juror number ten was an ill-mannered man who was very bigot.

Finally, Wayne Williams took the stand and testified, which resulted in very unfavorable attention from the jury (The Atlanta, n.d.). His angry and combative demeanor on the witness stand left jury members with little sympathy (The Atlanta, n.d.). It only took the jury approximately ten hours to deliberate and reach a guilty verdict, however, if the fiber evidence was not presented I do not believe the deliberation would have been so quick and most likely would have resulted in a not guilty

8: I think that… as a juror… we have to really think, we have to think about all the evidence, about all the outcomes. Well if I voted guilty at the initial vote, we would’ve let the boy die but as a juror being given jury duty… one of the highest duties of citizenship… is a big duty and being trusted and chosen to have a person’s life in your hands is just way too much pressure to handle and is one of the hardest things to do in your own lifetime and a one of a lifetime experience that you will just never forget. I would say that a case like this takes so much time and needs to have a proper moral to end up with the right

In a New York City, an 18-year-old male from a slum is on a trial claiming that he is responsible for his father death by stabbing him After both sides has finished their closing argument in the trial, the judge asks the jury to decide whether the boy is guilty or not The judge informs the jury decided the boy is guilty, he will face a death sentence as a result of this trial The jurors went into the private room to discuss about this case. At the first vote, all jurors vote guilty apart from Juror 8 (Henry Fonda), he was the only one who voted “Note Guilty” Juror 8 told other jurors that they should discuss about this case before they put a boy into a death sentence