Stop And Frisk Analysis

Referencing the case of Harper, 171 Ga. App. at 64, 318 S.E.2d 502, it stated that evidence cannot sustain a conviction “unless there is some peculiarity in the tracks to identify them as belonging to the accused.” The peculiarity requirement of Harper would only apply if the tire track impression was the sole evidence. Which this is not the case and, therefore, Harper did not apply here. In Brown V. The State, the Court upheld the testimony of the deputies as admissible circumstantial evidence to show similarities because other evidence that was submitted that was able to link Brown to the crime

Racial Tension in Michael Brown 's case On August 9, 2014, eighteen-year-old Michael Brown was shot by Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. The shooting caused protests and has drawn the world’s attention because Michael Brown was an unarmed black man while Darren Wilson is a white police officer. People believe Michael Brown’s shooting involves a racial tension between blacks and whites since Brown was unarmed and surrendered. In Ferguson, the majority of people are African Americans, and the majority of police officers are white. On the night of the shooting incident, Brown was walking home and confronted by Wilson because Wilson thought Brown was suspicious.

The rule is intended to prevent police officers from violating the rights granted by the Fourth Amendment. Thus, evidence obtained by the police that violates the Fourth Amendment cannot be used to convict someone accused of a crime. Some people think that without this rule, the Fourth Amendment would not make sense. As with many other legal rules, this rule has several exceptions. In the Supreme Court relied on the rule of "good faith" holding that the evidence obtained by the officers conducting inquiries based on a "good faith" court order that is subsequently found to be deficient is also admissible.

Title: Schneckloth v. Bustamonte Date/Court: The United States Supreme Court, 1973 Facts: This case deals with Clyde Bustamonte, who tried to defraud a check. At 2:40 a.m. local Sunnyvale Police Officer James Rand stopped a vehicle that had a burnt out headlight and license plate light. When Officer Rand approached the vehicle he found that the individuals Joe Alcala, Bustamonte, and Joe Gonzales were in the front seat. In the rear of the vehicle Officer Rand saw three older gentlemen, Officer Rand then asked the driver if he had identification and the driver (Gonzales) did not have any. Rand then asked the other individuals in the car and only Alcala had a valid license, after producing his license Alcala told the officer that the car was his brothers.

Disclosure was opposed by the district attorney on the grounds that it would have a “chilling effect” on the witnesses, who are promised anonymity and also pressure on the prosecutor would pile up for pressure from public to deliver a certain result if secrecy was no longer sacrosanct. It is the secrecy that shield the grand jury from any kind of accountability with public is simply led in suspicion as to the techniques and prejudices that lead to a deliberation behind closed doors. In another case where Shabbir Ali Mirza was jailed by a majority in U.K. was alleged bias on the pretext that he presented evidence through an interpreter

Trayvon was on vacation to his father’s for the summer. One night, Martin was walking home when he was approached by a police officer doing neighborhood watch. Officer Zimmerman called into dispatch seeing Martin, the officer claimed to dispatch that Trayvon was a suspicious subject. Dispatch told the officer not to exit his squad car, Zimmerman refused and approached Martin anyway. As the officer approached Martin they got into an altercation as the officer reports, where Martin ended up dead at the scene.” Authorities released seven 911 calls from the night of the shooting.

The most essential part of our judicial system is that it is based on the presumption that the accused is innocent unless proven guilty beyond doubt. Also it is better that ten guilty are held free than one innocent being falsely implicated in a case. Thus the burden of proof in a criminal case is very high. Circumstantial evidence is basically the evidence which is furnished not by direct testimony of an eye witness to the fact to be proved, but by relying on the fact or other auxiliary facts which can be relied upon as incompatible with any result other than truth of principal fact. Circumstantial evidence can be fully apprehended if it is compared in context of direct evidence.

Paul Butler says, “Part of what may have made a difference to the jury was the officer’s very emotional reaction after the shooting. He’s somebody who realizes that he’s made a grievous mistake. It’s certainly an argument for a manslaughter conviction rather than a murder conviction. People who do harm in the heat of the moment still deserve punishment.” (Bosman and Smith 16). The officer was not in the right state of mind to deal with the situation.

Gallini (2009), who holds a Juris doctor, a master of law degree, and is widely recognized in the community for his opinions on interrogation techniques, is a firm disbeliever in the Reid Technique. He believes that “the methodology underlying the Reid technique fails every aspect of the Supreme Court’s standards governing the admission of expert evidence” and that evidence collected through the Reid technique should not be relied on (p. 529). In addition to Gallini’s beliefs, Dr. Christian Meissner, who holds a Ph.D. in cognitive and behavioral sciences, has stated in multiple texts that the interrogation methods used by law enforcement frequently produce false confessions. If the suspect believes that there is evidence against him, if he truly believes that all hope is lost, and then is offered a bargain. If he confesses he could get a lighter prison sentence.

In many cases, we hear that police refuses to file a FIR unless pressurized by media or some social, official or political authority. The person is already suffering and on the other hand, police harasses him by not accepting the FIR. The police officer is duty bound to lodge FIR in every cognizable case. If a police officer gets a complaint from an aggrieved person about the cognizable offense, he must lodge a FIR. When a police officer refuses to do so, one must approach the SP of the concerned area regarding