Monster: The Autobiography of an L.A. Gang Member is written by Sanyika Shakur. This novel is about his life and experiences within the Crips gang in South Central Los Angeles. Shakur released his memoir in 1993, after turning his life around while inside the prison system. His given name at birth was Kody Scott and at just eleven years old, Kody was initiated into the Crips after shooting a rival gang member and later earned himself the street name of Monster due to his horrifying acts of violence.
1. Ethical concern. Describe and give examples of the concern. How is it pertinent to the field of criminal justice? o For example, the area of the courts and concerns over jury nullification This concern stems from the larger issue of citizens serving as the conscience of the community and a jury’s ethical obligation to abide by law but its refusal to convict in a situation which would lead to an unjust result.
Dizon, Nadine C. MA-COM I The three “points” I will be discussing in this paper are the case studies from each of the sections of the course. The case study on Defamation was about Chicago Police Officer Richard Nuccio who shot a civilian and Elmer Gertz who was the lawyer hired by the victim’s family. The magazine, American Opinion then published an article turned the entire situation around and made the case about being a “war against the police” and even using Gertz’ supposed communist beliefs as one of the key factors in this case. The author even claimed to have “had conducted extensive research into the Richard Nuccio case.” This issue alone – minus the analysis and the Court’s decision – is so ridiculous that you would think that the
In the case Jane Doe v. Uber a rape victim sues Uber for wrongly obtaining her medical records. Doe is suing Uber Technologies Inc. and three current and former executives. She’s currently claiming they breached her privacy by obtaining and publicizing her medical records. The plaintiff Jane Doe of Texas sued Uber after new information came up. Eric Alexander along with the CEO Travis Kalanick, and former senior vice president Emil Michael are the defendants in the litigation.
He was faced with a predicament that enforced him to choose between two moral responsibilities that are mutually exclusive. Upholding impartiality in this case would mean acting for the greater good of public, and consequently renders the violation of family obligation. As a president of Massachusetts State Senate, he was expected to set an example. However, he made the wrong decision by defending his felonious brother. It was believed that William Bulger was morally reprehensible in refusing to assist the authorities as family loyalty should not precede impartiality.
Utilitarianism is the act committed, ways to prevent new crimes, and how to stop from repeating the crime. Last virtue ethics is character of the person, it is to achieve civil peace through moral virtues, and it helps rehabilitate or reform the offender. If Nifong believed that the defendants were in fact guilty then he could use the evidence he had against them. He had enough to support the beliefs that he had; therefore, if he believed them to be guilty, he could have gathered enough evidence to support that belief rather than hide the proof favorable to the defendants. I do not see the moral permissibility to bring charges to FedEx.
Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus is not only express the story of Eugene’s violence but also institutional and national also. Aunty Ifeoma and other lecturers who are tracked by the Sole Administrator and they are harassed and thrown out of the system. Papa- Eugene family’s bitter experiences are co-existed with the society’s illegal activities. On the day of Pentecost Sunday carries two brutal incidents. The first incident is Beatrice miscarriage and the second one is the public execution of three drug dealers.
The ongoing issue of unethical practices in justice professions can be very unidentifiable if a person does not know what to look for. To be an ethical person it is essential to understand what it means to be ethical to oneself. A person with good ethics is someone who portrays a strong moral character, with the ability to determine the difference between good and evil duties. Duties refers to the actions a person takes in order to be considered a commendable act (Pollock, 2015). Back to the example of Lewis Kearney, instead of the security guard arresting him and exercising his professional duty, the guard could have used his knowledge to set Kearney up with a help program.
Garofalo rejected the traditional rule that discipline ought to fit the wrongdoing, contending rather that it ought to fit the criminal. As a decent positivist, he trusted that offenders have little control over their activities. This denial of through and through freedom (and, consequently, of good obligation) and fitting the discipline to the guilty party would in the end lead to sentencing went for the sympathetic and liberal objectives of treatment and restoration. For Garofalo, nonetheless, the main inquiry to be considered at sentencing was the risk the guilty party postured to society, which was to be judged by a wrongdoer 's
If the criminal process’s disciplinary is effective to prevent crime. The crime control theory would result in the state official is likely to violate the freedom of the people easily. The state official is authorized to use the extensive compulsory legal in order to effectively prevent crime. The result is that the court does not agree to hear evidence obtained illegally that will not appear at all or are very sparse. The court will hold the value of the evidence rather than to relinquish valuable witness.
JACKSON COUNTY, W.Va. — Authorities in Jackson County arresting 13 people Tuesday as part of a warrant sweep. The Jackson County Bureau of Investigation, Sheriff 's Office and the Ravenswood Police Department made the sweep as part of a focus on a multi-state methethamphetamine investigation. The drug was from Mexican cartels and was being sold in Jackson County. Authorities arrested: — Danielle Seagraves, 40, on charges of possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance and delivery of a controlled substance; — Nicholas Hopper, 34, for possession with intent to deliver a controlled substance; — Bradley Hickman, 20, for three counts of delivery of a controlled substance; — William P. Huft, 62, on charges of delivery of a controlled
United States v. Morrison was a supreme court case about violence against women. In 1944 while enrolled at Virginia polytechnic institute, Christy Brzonkala alleged that Antonio Morrison and James Crawford sexually assaulted her. Both male students were varsity football players. In 1995 Christy filed a complaint against Morrison and Crawford under Virginia Tech 's Sexual Assault Policy. After a hearing, Morrison was found guilty and Crawford was not.
Per the summons and complaint, plaintiff claims assault and false arrest. Plaintiff claims that defendant PO Argelis Rodriguez and other MOS stopped him and accused him of throwing away a handgun. Plaintiff states that he did not possess a handgun. Plaintiff claims that PO Rodriguez assaulted him in the head, body, face and buttock. Plaintiff alleges that he was placed in handcuffs then his pants and underpants were removed and he was searched on the ground in public
Cameron Todd Willingham was put to death for killing his girls, by setting the house on fire purposely in Corsicana, Texas. The arson inspector’s findings were that the house was purposely set on fire due to lab tests and burn patterns. Willingham was put to death at the Texas State Penitentiary in February 2009. The Texas Forensic Science Commission determined that the local and state arson investigators used “flawed science” when the fire was labeled as arson. Experts stated that the findings were careless (Ryan 261-313).
• Missouri v. Seibert- (2004) A decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that struck down the police practice of first obtaining an inadmissible confession without giving Miranda warnings, then issuing the warnings, and then obtaining a second confession. • Moran v. Burbine- (1986) the respondent was apprehended by police for murder. While in custody, but before any arraignment proceedings, the respondent waived his right to counsel and confessed to the crimes. Unbeknownst to the respondent, his sister found an attorney to represent him. The attorney contacted the police and informed them of his representation, and the police responded that they were not questioning him at that time.