Daniel Holtzclaw's court case has been going on for weeks and today they finally came to a verdict. This ex-Oklahoma City police officer was charged with 36 various counts including sexual battery, stalking and more. After 45 hours, the jury finally came to a decision on December 10 and Holtzclaw was found guilty on 18 of the 36 counts. This jury obviously took their time making up their mind. Once they started trying to decide, they were not allowed to go home and took breaks only when it got really late at night, but then started over again in the morning.…
Additionally, in this trial, the implications of an elected versus appointed judge can be seen. Judge Horton did the right thing by overturning the conviction of Haywood Patterson, he did so at great risk. Horton, an elected judge, basically ended his career with this move. It is this situation that leads me to believe that judges should be appointed rather than elected. Not every judge, especially when put in a situation like this, would have the integrity to ignore the political ramifications of their decision.…
Response to ‘Jimmy’ Gargasoulas on bail heavily scrutinised Historical records of ‘Jimmy’ Gargasoulas released for public review Social media posts reveal the nature of Mr Gargasoulas “I’LL TAKE YOU ALL OUT ... YOU NEED AN ARMY TO TAKE ME.” Community was heavily involved as it occurred within the City Media sources have released and reviewed police actions Strong political awareness for the incident that has occurred…
The issue of whether the judge should keep his position or be removed was debated after the public become aware of his sentence. It is believed that the judge shouldn’t lose his job after one unfair decision. In an article written by Paul Butler, a law professor and former prosecutor called “Judicial Recall Will Inevitably Lead to Harsher Sentences” he brings up a point that if Persky’s records reflect a pattern of unfairness, then he should be removed from the bench. However, if the judge had simply made a bad decision on the case, then a recall is unnecessary. A judge should consider about how popular their decision is to the public because “[t]his would inevitably lead to harsher punishment because, politically, it’s always safer for a judge…
Error 1 Perhaps the most noticeable micro-level practice error displayed in the Gabriel Myers case can be seen in the case worker’s careless effort to provide informed consent for Gabriel’s medical treatment. According to the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) Code of Ethics, “In instances when clients lack the capacity to provide informed consent, social workers should protect their clients’ interests by seeking permission from an appropriate third party, informing clients consistent with the clients’ level of understanding. In such instances, the third party acts in a manner consistent with clients’ wishes and interest” (Socialworkers.org, 2008). To address certain behavioral issues related to traumatic experiences, case workers…
The Judge oh no set me freeeee Have you heard of Judge Dredd? Have you heard of Judge Gesell? Unlike Judge Dredd, in bloody Batman Comics and an R rated movie, Judge Gesell was just a Judge doing what is right and making a living.…
What’s Wrong With Being Involved Death is sad subject and it is even more devastating when people stand idly by and let it take place. In “37 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call The Police”, published on the 27th of March 1964 in the New York Times by Martin Gansberg, contends that America was becoming callous. The article Gansberg wrote was about the murder of Catherine Genovese by Winston Moseley. According to Gansberg, 37 people witnessed the attack and murder of Catherine Genovese without phoning the police.…
Tommy Murphy is a nine-year-old boy who has been medically diagnosis of AD/HD and he takes medication for. Tommy is in the 4th grade and attends Parkview Elementary School. He currently has an Individual Educational Plan because of a learning disability. He also receives speech services at school twice a week. Tommy is currently placed in a Special Day Class (SDC)…
Bias in a Jury Juries are made up twelve randomly selected individuals. These people have to be U.S. citizens and have other qualifications to serve on a jury. Jurors are responsible for convicting someone of a crime. Most cases only take up to two or three days. Jurors have conversations discussing whether or not they should accuse the person guilty or non-guilty.…
Students at The University of Alabama weigh in on the House Judiciary Committee’s decision to send the bill that would end judicial override to the House floor on Wednesday. The committee voted 10-2 on the bill that would no longer allow judges to rule on the death penalty, shifting the responsibility to the jury instead. “It would appear that having 12 people on a jury making the decision would be more valid because there are more opinions,” said Carter Helm a freshman majoring in marketing from Chattanooga, Tn. Jameson Evans a sophomore majoring in computer science from Moscow, Idaho weighed in with his experience from his home state. “A jury always makes that decision in Idaho and it has never been a problem,” he said.…
Also, that his demeanor continued to be very poor. He was almost held in contempt of court for disobeying the judge to keep silent. In the end he was sentenced to 19 years in prison. It was also rare, that almost all jurors returned for the sentencing, which most do not attend because they are not made too. I thought about it after I had awhile to sit and think, and I wonder if others feel the way that I did when I was in the courtroom.…
“It took them only a short time to reach their verdict. “Guilty of murder in the first degree,” said the foreman of the jury” (David 15). The jury disregarded all of the reasonable doubt shown, and declared them guilty without even much deliberation. Despite this verdict, the defense had expected this and were ready to appeal the verdict. New evidence arose after the trial, and this evidence should have cleared the two of all guilt.…
Juror #8 In the play “Twelve Angry Men” the Juror No.8 was a very important character, without him there would not have been any conflict and the young boy would have been executed without a proper trial. An Architect by profession, he stood out from the rest of jurors. He had the gift for intuitive thinking, understanding complex human relationships and inspiring others. He believed in trial-by-jury system and did his best to have the necessary procedures to come up with a fair outcome.…
The court decision to acquit former NFL star O.J. Simpson of murder will forever be regarded as an example of how the we as Americans must trust the process of the legal system that we abide by. Guilt or innocence in the commission of a crime must be proved without a reasonable doubt, no matter the circumstances or evidence. Despite the extravagant evidence that implicated O.J. Simpson to the murder, the prosecution failed to establish in the minds of the jury that he committed the crime. The defense was able to shift the focus off the damaging evidence of the crime, and more towards the acquisition of that evidence, the ill-treatment of the crime scene, and the history of the Los Angeles Police Department in regards to treatment of minority groups. It can be said that the celebrity status of this case greatly influenced the verdict, as well as the circumstances that led up to that decision.…
Peer Pressure: Peer pressure effects on individual decision making. Therefore, it influenced the jurors to think for themselves. For example, juror number two was easily swayed by opinions of others. He had no confidence in himself and his own beliefs.…