Aniyah Brooks COR 100/27252 Professor Buffaloe 14 March 2018 The constitutional rights of the suspects in the central park were denied. The Fifth Amendment clearly states that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentable or indictment of a Grand jury… nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself.” Therefore these rights were violated because the five teen suspects were unaware of these rights and were interrogated wrongfully. At the crime scene no evidence was found, which shows that instead of law enforcement following the right principles of the law they took advantage and tried to diminish the suspects. There are certain procedures that must be followed
Those are the laws and therefore they must be followed. The strictest law is the prohibition of anyone crossing the great river and looking at the Place of the Gods. It is forbidden because of the demons and spirits that are there. No one dared to go there. Breaking a law would lead to a cruel punishment of course.
In a different perspective some may see Elizabeth as guilty. It was found that during the court hearing she lied under oath about her husband and Abigail having an affair to protect him. She chose the worst time to tell that lie and it showed her as being dishonest which is a very strong point for believing that she is guilty. If someone lies about a situation then it is much harder to trust them in anything
This is why the evidence used to convict said people was not legitimate. The evidence used to incriminate these individuals included, public confession and ownership of the “devil’s mark”. Ocksreider states, “...The magistrates openly encouraged public confessions. To elicit such confessions, the prosecuted were often subjected to stand for lengthy periods without sleep or food while being questioned” (Pg. 14).
For the past two decades, “The Innocence Project” with the help of updated science methods have worked relentlessly to get innocent people out of prison. Through DNA testing, they have been able to find new evidence that have freed hundreds of prisoners who were wrongfully convicted. Other factors such as eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, government misconduct, and inadequate defense also played keys roles in the wrongful convictions. The case that I would I would like to highlight today is that of, Johnnie Lindsey. Johnnie Lindsey was a 30-year old laundry worker who was falsely accused of rape.
(Keene) B. Whether from evidence or a personal hunch, some interrogators interview suspects as if they are guilty, which causes an incorrect interrogation that leads to extensive stress and pressure. C. But if the investigator approaches the interrogation believing the detainee is guilty, the ensuing interrogation is more pressure-filled and coercive. This results in the innocent detainee (who is likely to waive their rights) being at increased risk for false confession due to the pressure of the interrogation process. (Keene) D.
The victim is not required to testify, except in some cases, or provide any further information in order for prosecution to continue. In situations where the victim does not want to participate, prosecutors may simply use factual evidence and witness testimony in order to get a conviction (Corsilles, 1994). However, in other cases where there is not enough evidence, victims may have to be subpoenaed in order to provide the courts with enough information for the prosecution to continue with the charges. The final treatment of cases under this policy regards the option of dropping a case. Although not common, there are some cases in which the victim and the aggressor choose to come to terms and the victim wants the charges to be dropped.
It was mainly used as a method to suppress the Freedom Movement. Several freedom fighters, including Tilak, and Gandhi have been jailed under this law. Nehru himself criticised the law, saying “that particular section is highly objectionable and obnoxious and it should have no place both for practical and historical reasons, if you like, in any body of laws that we might pass. The sooner we get rid of it the better.” The sedition law is a draconian law in that it does not require the speaker to incite violence against the state. It simply requires that they “excite disaffection,” a term which the statute specifies “includes disloyalty and all feelings of enmity,” extremely vague terms.
Despite the television show's portrayal of trace evidence and other physical evidence being left behind at every crime scene, this is not the case in every criminal investigation. In fact, many criminal investigations yield no evidence that can be forensically tested. This means the investigator must gather information from the crime scene such as witness statements, victim statements, possible suspects including those who are seen fleeing, as well as any physical evidence.The investigator must also follow any leads gathered from victim and witness statements. While in CSI the investigator always catches the criminal within an hour, a criminal investigation may take days, weeks, months and even years before being solved. Sometimes a criminal investigation may not produce any further leads causing the case to be set aside.
A single mother might not always have the money or the time to take care of and raise a dependent child. The mother would want an abortion to be able to continue in school and escape poverty or just because she knows that there’s no way she’ll be able to take care of it emotionally or physically. Alternately there are pro-life groups that want to make abortions illegal. They believe that if the mother has an abortion it’s murder and that it prevents a person from living and stops their possible potential. The kid that was aborted could have been the next Gandhi or a top NFL player but because of abortions we’re preventing that from