The Trial Of Lizzie Borden : Complex Court Case

In January 1692, when a group of juvenile girls began to display bizarre behavior, the tight-knit Puritan community of Salem, Massachusetts couldn’t explain the unusual afflictions and came to a conclusion. Witches had invaded Salem. This was the beginning of a period of mass hysteria known as The Salem Witch Trials. Hundreds of people were falsely accused of witchcraft and many paid the ultimate price of death. Nineteen people were hung, one was pressed to death, and as many as thirteen more died in prison. One of the accused Elizabeth Bassett Proctor, a faithful wife and mother, endured her fictitious accusation with honor and integrity.

A lot of people go to jail that are wrongfully accused of a crime. It is the defense’s job to do anything in their power to make sure this doesn’t happen. Andrew Madison vs the People is a case about Andrew Madison being charged with assaulting a police officer and using disorderly conduct. He was hanging out after school with some friends when two police officers, Kevin Bates and Tommy Majors, thought they were harassing students. The police officers went to the scene and asked Andrew Madison and his friend to see their IDs. There was a misunderstanding and Andrew Madison ended up being arrested. In the case of Andrew Madison vs the People, the defense had a stronger case because there is no burden of proof, and they just have to find holes in the witness statements.

2. Why did the defense attorneys for Lila Jimerson and Nancy Bowen, defendants in the 1930 Buffalo, NY murder trials of Clothilde Marchand, use witchcraft as part of their legal strategy to keep their clients from being executed in New York state for Second degree murder? How did these attorneys demonstrate that Henri Marchand, husband of the deceased Mrs. Clothilde Marchand, was involved in this ‘witchcraft scenario’ though he strenuously denied it during the trials? Include material from “The Red Lilac of the Cayugas: Traditional Indian Laws and Culture Conflict in a Witchcraft Trial in Buffalo, New York, 1930” by Sidney Harring in Spellbound, edited by Elizabeth Reis in your essay.

Throughout history, various cases have not been properly executed in such a way that rightful criminals are taken to justice (hence the creation of courtrooms). The result of improper trials have led to the death of innocent lives which is unfortunately not unprecedented. A trial that epitomizes such unfair charges, leading to the execution of an innocent, was the Lindbergh Baby Kidnapping Trial. Bruno Richard Hauptmann was not guilty of the murder pertaining to the Lindbergh’s baby; he was wrongly convicted under circumstantial and biased evidence. The kidnapping of the baby had led to widespread speculations, and caused the case to spread amongst the

In the long run, the courts were wrong a lot in the days of Lizzie Borden’s life, so she might have actually been

Lizzie killed her parents because when Andrew Borden’s death happened Lizzie said that she was in the loft but there were no footprints found, also later on, after the murders Lizzie seemed to have done a crime, so this means that she has probably have similar acts, before (THE MURDERS!). Lizzie killed her parents because she planned out the murders before so she bought a poisonous acid. There are many other facts and clues that support, Lizzie is guilty of her parents killings.

"Lizzie Borden took an axe, and gave her mother forty whacks; When she saw what she had done, she gave her father forty-one." Wrong. It is all wrong because Lizzie Borden is innocent. In 1892, the murders of Andrew and Abby Borden were committed. The real question is, is Lizzie Borden guilty or innocent? I strongly believe that Lizzie Borden is not guilty for the murder of her father and stepmother. I have these beliefs because there is no physical evidence proving that Lizzie is guilty, she wrote letters showing grief and a sensitive side, and Andrew had many people against him due to his business dealings. Altogether, it is simply not a possibility that Lizzie is guilty.

Female violence sounds like a patriarchal heresy. In the time of the Lizzie Borden trial, women were expected by society to be seen and not heard, marry a man that their family approved of, and procreate, because that’s quite clearly all they are good for. So even the slightest notion that women could ever think of committing a violent crime sent people running for the hills. The Victorian era was a time where intimate female friendships were a normalized commonplace, so the notion that a particular woman could swing a particular weapon at her step-mother and father was quite out there. Authors have taken these cultural criterions and used them to create their version of murder mysteries. Caroline Knox is a decorated poet who wrote “Lizzie Borden through Art and Literature”, which will be the highlight of this synthesis. Knox compares Borden’s parricides to historical events that were turning points of their time period. Likening female violence to such events puts a new perspective on the violent act, because it this time, this was unimaginable. The end of the empires was like Borden’s crime, because neither were heard of or fathomable. Utilizing the female violence theme really gives an edge that would not be attainable otherwise, simply because it was so scandalous for women to step out of the domestic sphere. Authors express the complexities associated with female violence through comparing Borden’s parricides to the fall of empirical forces.

In the Patty Hearst Trial, it is different from others because the criminal is also the victim. The case was on February 4,1976 and the crime was April 15, 1975, all set in southern California. The Symbionese Army and Patricia Hearst held up a bank robbery. After, a long trial of discussing if she was brainwashed to complete these crimes or was her choice to join the SLA which in the end she was named guilty and sent to jail for seven years. Despite being found guilty,justice was not served because she did not complete her original sentence of seven years.

Since the beginning of reconstruction, women have been fighting for equal rights. Women’s political parties have been formed, some states have ratified voting rights for women, and women in the workforce has increased. Women have always been viewed has “domestic”, only made to serve the husband and work within the household. However, these views were all scrutinized and drawn into question on when Lizzie Borden, the youngest daughter of the Borden family, was accused for the death of her father and step-mother. Kathryn Allamong Jacob, writer of “She couldn’t have done it, even if she did”, argues that Lizzie Borden couldn’t have commit the murders due to the “Victorian conception of womanhood”

	Furthermore, the prosecution never proved the weapon was an axe. When Officer Mullaly asked if there were hatchets in the house, Lizzie replied with, "Yes, they are everywhere." Bridget and Mullaly went down to the basement and found four hatchets: one rusty claw-headed hatchet, two that

The author, Phyllis A. Roth, is not your ordinary feminist, because she is also a Freudian. A better term to describe Roth would be a psychoanalytic feminist. One of her works as an author can be found in the back of the book Dracula: A Norton Critical Edition. Her criticism article is titled Suddenly Sexual Woman in Bram Stoker’s Dracula. In her article she analyzes the famous novel Dracula. She explores how gender plays a role in the novel and the concept of femininity. She writes about the transformation that takes place when a proper lady turns into a sexual vampire. Her article points out where hostility toward women 's sexuality is displayed in the novel, that the average reader may not pick up on. Roth has a strong argument. Let us examine Roth’s case.

Lastly, Abigail Williams threatened all of the girls to admit only that they were dancing in the forest, but nothing else. They knew that she had drank blood as a charm to kill John Proctors wife. The only reason for this was that she wanted John Proctor for herself, and she didn't want her uncle to find out about it. Also, she didn't want her name to be blackened in the village, seeing that she was the niece of Reverend Parris. If they found out she had drank blood, she would be convicted of witchcraft and then hanged. All of the girls began accusing women as a group after Beth woke up towards the end of Act One. They did this to keep themselves from being accused by each other, and also to draw attention to themselves. Abigail said she had seen things done by the Indians that were unspeakable. If any of them were to talk about what actually happened in the forest, she would do some of those things to them.

I think Susan B. Anthony, did not have a fair trial. This trial was a big farce they had no intention in giving her to have a fair trial. Officially they had a jury present at her trial, but the jury was a group of men that were there for show. When you consider that the judge told the jury to find her guilty. What chance did she have in winning her case? I definitely agree with her that she did not have jury trial. Susan B. Anthony was judged by a group men who had certain strong beliefs that women really didn’t have any rights in regard to how the United States should evolve after the civil war. They still had the attitude that the women’s movement was a big nothing. Women should not vote why should they? Women were still thought as inferior

Have you ever been so angry you thought about killing your parents with an axe? Well many people think Lizzie Borden did this exact thing. Lizzie Borden was accused of murdering her step mother and father with a hatchet on August 4, 1892. While on trial, the jury found her innocent, but many other people think her to be guilty. I think that Lizzie Borden is innocent of the murder of Andrew and Abby Borden because she loved her father, didn’t have a problem with her stepmother, and there was no physical evidence found at the crime scene. Lizzie Borden was found innocent by law, so why should it be questioned?