Persuasive Argument
Have you ever been in a court or been tried for a crime? Have there been any witnesses on these trials. Well if you have then you probably know that they are heavy trusted and needed. I’m going to be talking about how some of the witnesses are not reliable and that we need to fix how we pick them and trust them. My first point is that witnesses have all the trust, by just holding the bible and swearing an oath, people can still lie. My second argument is that that they just have way too much power in the court. My last subject on this is Misidentification which is the most common way witnesses can be unreliable.
First I have the point that witnesses have all the trust from the court. Some people not be religious so putting …show more content…
Maybe the witness really doesn’t like the defendant or maybe they really do like them. With both of that said they would lie to save them or lie to put them away maybe for something they didn’t do. Also they could be scared to say anything so they don’t say what they really need to.
My last point is that it can be as easy as misidentification you could have been traumatized and would have seen something that you think is different. You could have given the wrong name or description to someone that actually didn’t do it, now they’re getting blamed for something that they never did. There are a lot of people who look alike so it would be normal to get people confused. But we can’t have them getting confused because we don’t want to send an innocent person of the crime. We need to tighten up on our facts and take the time to do the case and really get all the evidence.
Counter …show more content…
He was originally going in for as a jury but could not make it as a result they took a hair sample for his DNA as a protocol. They matched him to the scene of the crime and was a close match to the semen found in the victim. He was arrested and went to court a couple of month later. One of the main witnesses where a FBI analyst that had examined his sample. She told the judge that it was him that matched the crime scene so he was sentenced to life in prison with the death penalty. About 25 years later someone robbed a store and was arrested. He was DNA tested and was an exact match to the semen sample and the other DNA found at the crime scene. He admitted to the crime and wasn’t sentenced till about year later to life in prison. Donald was still in prison through all of this and wasn’t released till 2 years after the other man was arrested because the judge decided to give the police a chance make sure everything was correct. He was released after 28 years in prison and wasn’t given a penny for the time he was only given 50 bucks and a bus ticket to get back
Have you ever been in a court or been tried for a crime? Have there been any witnesses on these trials. Well if you have then you probably know that they are heavy trusted and needed. I’m going to be talking about how some of the witnesses are not reliable and that we need to fix how we pick them and trust them. My first point is that witnesses have all the trust, by just holding the bible and swearing an oath, people can still lie. My second argument is that that they just have way too much power in the court. My last subject on this is Misidentification which is the most common way witnesses can be unreliable.
First I have the point that witnesses have all the trust from the court. Some people not be religious so putting …show more content…
Maybe the witness really doesn’t like the defendant or maybe they really do like them. With both of that said they would lie to save them or lie to put them away maybe for something they didn’t do. Also they could be scared to say anything so they don’t say what they really need to.
My last point is that it can be as easy as misidentification you could have been traumatized and would have seen something that you think is different. You could have given the wrong name or description to someone that actually didn’t do it, now they’re getting blamed for something that they never did. There are a lot of people who look alike so it would be normal to get people confused. But we can’t have them getting confused because we don’t want to send an innocent person of the crime. We need to tighten up on our facts and take the time to do the case and really get all the evidence.
Counter …show more content…
He was originally going in for as a jury but could not make it as a result they took a hair sample for his DNA as a protocol. They matched him to the scene of the crime and was a close match to the semen found in the victim. He was arrested and went to court a couple of month later. One of the main witnesses where a FBI analyst that had examined his sample. She told the judge that it was him that matched the crime scene so he was sentenced to life in prison with the death penalty. About 25 years later someone robbed a store and was arrested. He was DNA tested and was an exact match to the semen sample and the other DNA found at the crime scene. He admitted to the crime and wasn’t sentenced till about year later to life in prison. Donald was still in prison through all of this and wasn’t released till 2 years after the other man was arrested because the judge decided to give the police a chance make sure everything was correct. He was released after 28 years in prison and wasn’t given a penny for the time he was only given 50 bucks and a bus ticket to get back