How Did Brian Banks Respond To Rape Mentally Inhumane?

Before the trial even started, the entire court house was evacuated due to the fire alarm going off. After the building was cleared, we were allowed back in and returned to normal operations. I stayed for half a day of the trial in this case. My first initial observations were that the lawyers from both sides were rather friendly with each other and talked as friends. I also noticed a difference in the way the lawyers performed during the trial. ASA Williams was very calm and collected, very well versed, and did not appear to react in any negative manner when the defense made an objection. In my opinion, PD Scarbrough did a mediocre job during this trial. She appeared to be nervous when she spoke to the judge or the jury, and also when the prosecution made any objection she appeared to get flustered rather quickly. In my opinion, the judge handled the trial extremely well and I feel that she ruled correctly when she made her

Plaintiff Jane Paul moves the Court for its order barring Defendant or his witnesses from referring to or presenting any evidence or argument regarding Ms. Paul’s past alcoholism, her DWI conviction, or the Defendant’s religious beliefs, because such evidence is irrelevant and could unduly prejudice the jury. A fair trial requires that the jury consider only the evidence relevant to the issues. Ford v. Gordon, 990 S.W.2d 83, 85 (Mo. Ct. App. 1999). Evidence is relevant only if it “tends to prove or disprove a fact at issue” or bears on the witness’s credibility. Id. For example, while a witness’s reputation for being truthful is relevant, the witness’s character flaws unrelated to truthfulness are not; such evidence is usually offered only to prejudice the jury. State v. Eisele, 414 S.W.3d 507, 515 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013) (holding that evidence of witness’s use of profanity was irrelevant to witness’s credibility

You're not gonna tell me you believe that phony story about losing the knife, and that business about being at the movies. Look, you know how these people lie! It's born in them! I mean what the heck? I don't even have to tell you. They don't know what the truth is! And lemme tell you, they don't need any real big reason to kill someone, either! No sir! [Juror 10, page 51] This type of prejudice offended many of the other jurors, especially Juror 5 who is of similar race to the accused.

At the close of trial proceedings, the judge informed the jury that they could find the eight accused to be guilty even if the crime was committed by someone who was not charged. He also said that it was not necessary for the state to know the identity of the bomber or to prove that the bomber had read any of the articles or poster of the charged anarchists. Though the judge, prosecutor, and jury can be considered misguided in their bias and actions of injustice, some of the witnesses against the accused are widely acknowledged as liars. In comparison to the eyewitnesses of the defendants, every part of their details went against those of the witnesses of the police.

Gannon, T. A., Collie, R. M., Ward, T., & Thakker, J. (2008). Rape: Psychopathology, theory and treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(6), 982+. Retrieved from http://libraries.state.ma.us/login?gwurl=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=PPCJ&sw=w&u=mlin_n_umass&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA180235134&asid=3c616fbc8211e513b96e006b8f8dffd4

The victims had bite marks all over their bodies. Something like that could have not been missed. The forensics claim that they didn’t pay much attention to those marks and that belt buckles did them, but the profundity of the bite concludes that it wasn’t belt buckles. Bite marks are very important evidence just as DNA and fingerprints; it can actually be evidence that could prove your innocence. A certified forensic odontologist compared the bite impression, and they did not match any of the three boys. If this evidence was presented during their trial, then they would not have spent those years in jail. The evidence could have changed the mind of the jurors into rethinking their decision before giving a final verit. Submitting this evidence would have greatly helped in the defense of Misskelley, Echols, and

"A Trial without witnesses, when it involves a criminal accusation, a criminal matter is not a true trial." (Bill McCollum) It is not fair to convict a person of a crime just because a person claims they are guilty. There needs to be evidence and proof to make sure they are telling the truth. People are accused wrong everyday. When people are accused wrong of something such as murder, it can ruin their life forever. One of the many people who suffered a wrong accusation was Kevin Green.

The trial court allowed the evidence to be admitted by citing an earlier decision, in Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980), that the Supreme Court’s description of Sixth Amendment rights did not bar the prosecution from admitting a statement from an unavailable witness, “… if the statement bears “adequate ‘indicia of reliability.’” Id., at 66.” (Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (2004), at 40). The trial court focused on the part of the test in Roberts that evidence must “… bear “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” [Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56 (1980), at 66]” (Id., at 40). The Washington Court of Appeals did not agree with the trial court because of the results of a test of nine-factors to determine trustworthiness (Id., at 41). Some of the main points

It’s my personal opinion, that the justice system and correctional system should be held responsible and accountable for the criminal activities that take place within the prison walls. Prison assaults and rape are known issues in the correctional system and little is done to fix the problem. These prison assaults have been taking place for decades and the assaults and rapes have increased as the younger and/or non-violent prisoners are housed in adult prisons. The Advocacy Groups and the Human Rights Watch should continue to push lawmakers to protect certain classes of prisoners. These groups cannot do it alone and the correctional system must enforce protection within the prisons. Furthermore, the correction system should develop and implement

In the past decade, eyewitness testimonies have cast a shadow on what is wrong with the justice system in today’s society. Before we had the advanced technology, we have today, eyewitness testimonies were solid cold-hard facts when it came to proving the defendant was guilty. However, time has changed and eyewitness testimonies have proven to be the leading causes of wrongful convictions due to misidentification. The Thompson and Cotton case is a perfect example of how eyewitness testimonies can put an innocent man behind bars.

Rape has been an ongoing issue within society for centuries. In early times, men raped women for reproductive purposes. Today, it is still believed

Members of the jury, go back to March 29, 2014, at 10:30 pm. We’re at the Mr. Gatsby, a evening restaurant and sports bar. Inside there are 350 people watching and cheering for the University of Nita basketball team compete against Nita State University. Suddenly, glass dishes shatter all over the place, tables are turned over, the spotlight is focused on two young men embroiled in a fury fist fight hailing out their war cries. That man, the defendant. That young man [指着 witness] sitting right there on the witness bench is responsible for starting the conflict.

Nowadays the judicial system doesn't always make things fair for everybody and can sometimes be rigged or influenced. During a trial, there are usually many witnesses. Some who rely on what they saw, others who rely on what the “word on the street” is. Sometimes a witness can even be someone who was involved in the crime and is testifying against their friends or defending themselves.

I couldn't agree with you more that people can be and are persuaded to come u with false memories by another person. Maybe because they are scared of the person or just want to get the proceedings over with. Since this happens, it is only right to have some type of physical evidence or even a polygraph just to be certain they have the right person. I also don't see how any amount of money could ever repay a wrongly accused person because of the missed time with friends and family. That is priceless in a person’s life that no amount could make up for it. Yes, the justice dept. should most definitely help the person get back on their feet, and make sure they are comfortable with their living situation for the rest of their lives. That's the least

The case is about a crime that was committed a few days before Christmas in which a drugstore owner, Alguinaldo Nesbitt was robbed and brutally murdered. Four main witnesses are called to the stand to give their testimonies. Richard “Bobo” Evans, a known thug in the neighborhood (who was already doing time for selling drugs) admits that he has known James King (the other person on trial