In 1991, a police officer from Illinois, Mary Redmond, shot and killed Ricky Allen in the line of duty. Allen’s family sued Redmond in federal court on the premise that Redmond “violated Allen’s civil rights by using excessive force” (Knapp & VandeCreek, 1997, p. 569). Prior to the court proceedings, it was discovered that Redmond engaged in individual therapy with a licensed social worker and Allen’s family intended to utilize the information from the sessions in the case against Redmond. (Shuman & Foote, 1999). During the proceedings, the social worker did not comply with providing the court specific confidential information from the individual therapy sessions resulting in the judge mandating the jurors to assume that the information that was refused would have been detrimental to Redmond. The jurors in the court case ruled in favor of Allen’s family and ordered Redmond to pay Allen’s family a significant sum of money. …show more content…
Redmond especially after the ruling was appealed and ultimately voided due to the initial court’s failure to account for the privilege that exists between a therapist and client (Knapp & VandeCreek,
MILLERSBURG — A Newcomerstown man last week denied criminal charges he was in the possession of drugs and a gun during a March traffic stop. Kristopher L. Lanning, 31, of 420 Pearl St., pleaded not guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to trafficking in marijuana, carrying a concealed weapon, improper handling of firearms in a motor vehicle and turning at an intersection. If convicted, Lanning faces up to 18 months in prison for the most serious offense.
Ogden vs. Gibbons was a controversial court case that was debated in 1824 after Aaron Ogden filed a restraint against Thomas Gibbons. Ogden and Gibbons were former business partners in the steamboat industry and for three years they successfully worked together throughout waterways in New York. Unfortunately Gibbons decided to operate another steamboat that came in conflict with Ogden’s steamboat and this is when Ogden filed a restraint against Gibbons. Ogden’s complaint was that he no longer wanted Gibbons to operate steamboats in New York waters. This was an important court case because the court had to figure out who had the power to control navigation in interstate waterways.
Vonlee Titlow was tried for murder when she and her aunt Billie Rodgers killed Billie's wealthy husband Donald Rodgers. The prosecution Presented Titlow with a plea bargain of manslaughter, for her testimony against her aunt Billie in her trial. Shortly before the Trial of Titlow's aunt Billie, she had a conversation with an officer, who instructed her not to take the plea if she was, in fact, innocent. After this conversation, Titlow got rid of her current lawyer for new counsel in her case. Toca who was brought in as this new counsel fought to get the length of the plea reduced to a lower term.
In U.S. v. Jones, Antoine Jones owned a popular nightclub in the District of Columbia. As the police department and FBI had reasonable suspicion to believe that cocaine trafficking was taking place in the club, law enforcement enabled strict surveillance. The strict surveillance consisted of cameras around the nightclub, officers obtained a warrant to implement device to register phone numbers of anyone calling Jones or calls Jones made and installed a wiretapping device. In addition, the officers installed a GPS tracking device in Jones vehicle, to install this device the officers had to obtained a warrant that allowed the GPS to be installed for ten days in the District of Columbia. However, as the car traveled to Maryland the officers changed
1962 marked the beginning of a new era for the South. Baker Vs. Carr, a landmark Supreme Court Case, determined that malappropriated state legislatures were unconstitutional. The Baker Decision resulted in an increase of legislators from urban districts. Rural legislators, who were once in complete control of state capitols, could no longer dominate legislatures in the South.
The Supreme Court of the United States Plaintiff: Keeble (Pomani's brother-in-law). Defendant: United States Legal Department (the attorney general, solicitor general, and deputy solicitor general) From: District Court of South Dakota. Law Firm: Chris and Luke Co. advocates.
Business Law Case Study Essay: Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, 573 U.S (2014) Facts: The Green family runs and owns Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., a national arts and skills chain that has over 500 stores and they have over 13,000 employees. Other facts of the case are that the Green family has been able to organize the business around the values of the Christian faith and has explicitly expressed the desire to run the company as told by Biblical principles, one of which is the belief that the utilization of contraception is wicked. Also, the facts show that under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), occupation -founded group health care plans must offer certain sorts of preventative care, for example, FDA-accepted contraceptive approaches.
In 2013, the Supreme Court case Moncrieffe v. Holder refuses a Board of Immigration Appeals to removal from the United States of a lawful permanent resident based on a long term criminal conviction related to sole possession of small amounts of marijuana. The case finally made it all the way to the Supreme Court, which is considered a rather technical question of the interpretation of the U.S Immigration laws. Local police departments have long been accused of profiling Hispanic, African-Americans, and other minorities of race in law enforcement activities, including run of the mill traffic stop. Critics fear that immigration enforcement by state and local authorities will lead to increase of racism. Many Americans have shown concerns with the implementation of racist discrimination of the U.S immigration laws by state police agencies and local authorities.
The legal guideline aims to remind psychologists about their primary obligations as well as rational “precautions to respect the confidentiality rights of those with whom they work or consult, recognizing that confidentiality may be established by law, institutional rules, or professional or scientific relationships.” Maintaining privacy and confidentiality of the defendant facilitate their openness assisting them to recall and relate “pertinent facts and events, including his motives and actions at the time of the offense, and be able to testify in his behalf and to challenge prosecution witnesses.”
On October 20, 2014, LaQuan Mcdonald was shot 16 times by law enforcement after being seen holding a knife. Although he was carrying a knife, video evidence showed that McDonald was in no way posing a threat to the responding officers. After the murder, the McDonald family revealed that LaQuan suffered from PTSD and complex mental health problems. However, there is no education for police officers on how to respond to people with disabilities or injuries. I am not justifying the murder of LaQuan McDonald, but I am trying to justify why defunding the police will only hurt our society more with the few requirements needed to become an officer.
When officers file reports, “[the] officers are able to characterize suspects’ demeanor, explain what was in the scene of crime, and provide overall crucial details pertaining to the case” (Ariel, 2014, p. 529). Unfortunately for the suspects, officers are not required to document specific details about the interaction that can be crucial to the investigation. For example, “how long the person was stunned with a Taser gun, or how many shots were fired into against an aggressive suspect, or how many times he or she was beaten with a baton before lying down” (Ariel, 2014, p. 522) are not specified in the officer’s report. Omitted vital specifics pertaining to use-of-force incidents has disrupted the link between police officers and the public. As a result, the public now hold an ‘us versus them’
In 1945, the High Court of Australia heard the case of Gratwick v Johnson and ultimately decided to dismiss the appeal in a unanimous decision by the Judges. While different reasoning was employed, all five judges drew the conclusion that the appeal should be dismissed as the statute the defendant was charged under was inconsistent with s.92 of the Australian Constitution. To provide some context for this case in 1944, Dulcie Johnson was charged with an offence against the National Security Act 1939-1943 in that she did contravene par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order by travelling from South Australia to Western Australia by rail. In brief terms par.3 of the Restriction of Interstate Passenger Transport Order provided that no person shall, without a valid permit, travel from state to state or territory.
Criminal Justice Psychologist The psychologist is a vital asset to the criminal justice system. The psychologist can examine victims, police officials and various witnesses thus making them ethically obligated to make the right decisions and evaluations. This essay will discuss the roles of psychologist as they work within the criminal justice system. I will Identify and describe the psychologists’ roles within the criminal justice system as it pertains to the applied scientist, the basic scientist, the policy evaluator, and the advocate.
Wrongful convictions are one of the most worrisome and tragic downsides to the Canadian Criminal Justice System. As stated by Campbell & Denov (2016). “cases of wrongful convictions in Canada call into question the ability of our criminal justice system to distinguish between the guilty and innocence” (p. 226). In addition, wrongful convictions can have devastating repercussions on the person, who was found guilty, effecting their personal/public identities, beliefs and family lives. This essay will be examine some of the common factors that apply to the conviction of an innocence person.
I had the opportunity to visit a Kankakee County Domestic Violence Court on February 24, 2016. The purpose of this assignment was to challenge me to think about social justice, oppression, and discrimination related to individuals and families as well as social service providers in the court system. The purpose of the Domestic Violence Court was designed to improve the safety of victims and their families through related family issues, such as custody, visitation, civil protection orders, divorce, and enhance offender accountability. My general observations of the court proceedings was that it was located on the third floor in room 309.