Jury nullification

Gideon’s Trumpet In 1961, a case appeared to the United States Supreme Court that challenged a well-accepted precedent established by the court almost 20 years prior. The case being discussed in this book is Gideon vs Wainwright, in which the defendant is a fifty-one-year-old white man in Florida. Gideon was accused of petty larceny, and eventually found guilty in court. Gideon, though, was representing himself, as he could not afford an attorney and was never provided with one. Gideon feels as…

Plato’s Apology tells the tale of Socrates’ defense, counterproposal, and death sentence in front of a jury of approximately 500 Athenian citizens. Plato’s Crito is named after a wealthy friend of Socrates who the philosopher invokes during his defense as an example of one of the men present in the jury who had enough exposure to his teachings, whether directly or through relatives, to have grounds to testify as a witness against Socrates if indeed his teachings were corrupting the young. An…

QUESTION 1 (4 marks) Briefly identify and explain the main communication weakness, in the way that defence counsel has sought to test the credibility of the evidence given by this witness, about how the accused reacted to the behaviour of the complainant. The main communication weakness in segment one is gratuitous concurrence. The first contribution leading to gratuitous concurrence can be drawn from the context of the cross-examination. The defence counsel a non-indigenous man is a…

The jury system to me is complex, it is a citizen’s way of helping out. The jury system is interesting because it is people who get called out and many of them have to do it. The sad part about the jury system is that financial hardships or other types of hardships get in the way. I think that I have seen very diverse jury’s except in two jury panels. One jury panel that was kind of odd to me was a recent one, it was the trial were a person was caught with a small knife they called a dagger. In…

Legal guilt should take precedence over factual guilt because legal guilt is considered as a more extensive arrangement of components that identify with a crime that wouldn't be viewed as factual guilt. Legal guilt depends on rule of law which makes all the more including rules that can quantify one's guiltiness. When intending to understand the root of the Canadian Criminal Justice system, it’s important to understand the difference between legal guilt and factual guilt. Briefly explaining what…

In this paper, I argue that Euthyphro’s defense of his view that his father is guilty of murder is not cogent. I will first present the argument that Euthyphro’s claim against his father is mainly rooted in circumstantial beliefs that can easily be disputed. Secondly, I will prove that Euthyphro is too unreliable of a source for the cogency of his sole account to be convincing. And lastly, I will argue that Euthyphro’s main reason for prosecuting his father does not have to do with his own moral…

Introduction Whilst observing criminal proceeding in the local, district and supreme courts, the intricate workings of the legal system within Australia became extremely apparent. It became clear during my time in court that the administration, process and practices of each court varied extremely depending on which level you were observing at the time. Similarly during such time spent in court, the distinctions between both summary proceeding and trail upon indictment became clear and could be…

The path I am on is paved with tile floors, and the lights above flicker in a way that reminds me of a school hallway. The path is seemingly endless, constantly branching, and is a mystery. Whenever it splits I am always presented with two choices: to go left, or to go right. The left path is always bright with sparkling floors and fresh air. The right path is much more foreboding. Most of the time, I can’t see more than a few feet in front of me and the air is heavy. I always try to go down the…

When it comes to the United States Supreme Court and the Juvenile Court, things changed in the 1960s, when the Supreme Court issued several decisions that would expand the due process rights for any criminal defendant. This was under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, who was concerned that civil liberties and human rights and how they were reflected in decisions. “In general, the Court believed that criminal defendants were citizens who were presumed innocent until they had been…

Based on information gathered by the prosecution prior to November 6th, 2017, I believe that the jury will find defendant Rebekah Ponder guilty of the murder of Walter White, and defendant Elshaday Yilma will be found complicit. However, evidence will be found insufficient for the jury or an otherwise reasonable person to convict either defendant of robbery. During the trial, the jury will convict Ponder and Yilma of murder and complicity to murder because of the evidence that will be proven…