In the case of Judy Norman should have been acquitted based on self-defense rather than being convicted of voluntary manslaughter. According to defense psychologist, Judy had been tortured, degraded, and reduced to an animal level of existence. Since her husband had abused her for twenty years physically assaulting her, burning her with cigarettes, forcing her into prostitution, and forcing her to eat dog food off the floor. Judy’s first resort was not to kill her husband, first, she contacted police after a horrible beating, but was so deep in a cycle of fear she did not press charges on her husband. For police officers to be first responders to domestic violence calls they should be trained to know the signs of domestic abuse, and the cycle …show more content…
Nancy and her husband Bob had been married for 31 years and had two sons together. Nancy was planning to divorce Bob because throughout their marriage there had been numerous occasions of spousal abuse. The morning of May 10th Nancy and Bob got into a heated argument because Bob had found out that Nancy had bought a condo in Florida and was planning on leaving him for good. Nancy then went on to explain that Bob said that he wasted his life with her and why didn’t Nancy just die, and he proceeded to kick her. Bob then proceeded to chase Nancy to the garage with a knife. Nancy responded by taking a hatchet that she had bought the day before and striking him fifteen times and then taking the knife that he had and stabbed him 21 times. Nancy then left to go to work at Longacre Elementary school after the murder. She came back during lunch to clean up the place before her son could see what had transpired in the garage, she said that she had planned to turn herself in but on her own terms. Nancy was caught when police officers found her husband’s body wrapped in a tarp in the trunk of her car a few days later. During the time of her trial both of her sons testified her youngest son testified on her behalf and her eldest son testified against her, giving two conflicting recollections of their marriage. Also, during the trial, the prosecutor argued that the murder was premeditated because they had proof that Nancy went to home depot May 9th and bought the hatchet that she used the next day to murder her husband. Nancy was found guilty of first-degree murder and was sentenced to life in prison. In 2010 Nancy appealed to the court to have her sentence overturned because she claimed her legal counsel was ineffective and did not create a strong case to prove that she suffered from battered woman syndrome. In 2012 the federal court of appeals denied her request for a retrial and she remains in jail
I think it would be difficult for the prosecution to form an argument off of my points. The prosecution admitted that they don’t argue that Ms. Stephens is a victim of abuse, but rather is not suffering from battered woman syndrome. Once I use all of my witnesses and explain how Ms. Stephens is a clear case of battered woman syndrome, I think they will have a difficult time arguing that considering she clearly has every sign and symptom. The only argument I think they can use would be that because Mr. Stephens went to take a nap, Ms. Stephens could have just called the police and not shot him herself. I think members of the jury may also agree with this purely on the basis that those who aren’t victims of abuse can easily have the mindset that
Denis O’ Connor Catholic High School RPT #2 Ethan Raphael B. Bautista Mr. Orsag March 30, 2015 Steven Truscott Steven Truscott was accused with the murder of Lynne Harper in 1959. Lynne Harper was his classmate during middle school.
Emma Hodges Topic 2A Defense of Mr. Smith While Mr. Smith is accused of assault, we can see that this is not true when we examine the precedent set in State v. Black. To examine both cases it is important to first know the circumstances of each. In State v. Black, the wife started a fight in which the husband, after much provocation, dragged her to the floor by her hair. In Mr. Smith’s case, his wife initiated an argument, within earshot of the couple’s eight-year-old child and a neighbor’s child, over the family’s finances and her husband’s drinking. Mr. Smith, overwhelmed by his wife’s screaming, threatened to hit her unless she stopped.
Nobody believe her that she was the killer. Most of the court room judge was all male. So, they didn’t believe that a woman could be able to kill her own family. She was guilty and wasn’t put in jail without any prove that she killed them.
After the attack Judy called the police on Charles but because they knew him very well they did nothing for her. Scared for her life Tracey found somewhere to go but it did little to help to stop the harassment of her husband. Day after day she had to deal with this many of time she called out for help, filing many police reports, nothing was still done. One day while Tracy was out she ran into Charles and in the public he attacked her, this time she had help a police officer seen this happening and Charles was arrested.
I had read an article that said the same week that lizzie was in trial because she was one of the suspected murders she had burned the dress that she wore that day her parents had died and it was covered in blood so to me that sounded like she was trying to hide something. Which at this time lizzie was not the most popular people in town especially to the people that knew her. I’ve also took into account that she maybe had evidence on her of she was holding her parents but the whole thing just seems kinda fishy. Which everyone in the community thought it was lizzie just of how she normally acts. The weapon that who ever the killer was had killed the parents with an axe
Steven Avery was accused of a sexual assault that happened on July 29th, 1985. It happen in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. The Avery family was always viewed as bad people who didn’t belong in the community. Steven was always viewed as a trouble maker but always owned up to everything he did. On his record was a burglary and participant in the crime of cruelty to an animal.
Leslie tried to hold down Mrs. LaBianca so Susan Atkins could kill her, but neither girl could do it. Leslie called Tex for help, and he dragged Mrs. LaBianca into a bedroom, and stabbed her. Leslie stood at the doorway and watched in awe. Tex spun Leslie around, handed her a knife, and said “do something,” so Leslie approached Mrs. LaBianca, and stabbed her in the lower back sixteen times. Mr. LaBianca was stabbed numerous times, and the word “war” was carved into his stomach.
The United States Supreme Court case Stanford vs. Kentucky was a national debate that permitted the hypocrisy of the death penalty, which at the time stated that all offenders who were of the age sixteen years or older at the time of their crime would receive the punishment of execution. The case took place on the day of March 27, 1989, and was officially decided on June 26, 1989. The argument began when Kevin Stanford, who was seventeen years old at the time, shot and killed twenty year old Barbel Poore on January 7, 1981. Stanford’s was trialed as an adult and was convicted of murder, first-degree robbery, and first-degree sodomy, and as a result received 45 years in prison as a punishment. Stanford declared that “he has the constitutional
Many people may think of Andrea Yates as the disgraceful mother who murdered all 5 of her children. Also many people do not know that she was severely ill. In fact she was found guilty of first degree murder and sentenced to life, but a court of appeals reversed the conviction and found her insane. She was diagnosed postpartum depression and psychosis. For the people who do know what postpartum depression mean is that each time she gave birth she got more depressed due to hormone change or fatigue.
A big reason why she killed her husband was probably because the unknown news that he told her would affect their future child. Right after the whole incident happened, she took the evidence of the leg of lamb and began to cook it in the oven, so it didn't look like a relevant murder weapon but rather just another meal. This would mean that the police would not be able to find any evidence or possibilities if she murdered Patrick Maloney. She also lied to the police while dealing with Sam, the grocer, to make herself an alibi. She made sure to practice acting to fool Sam and have a witness in her favour, which then convinced the police officers that she had an alibi and that she was still devoted to and loved Patrick.
I ask you what is self defense when the man she murdered laided defenseless and unconscious on his bed? The defendant is only claiming that she acted in self defense to get away with the cold-blooded murder of the man she claimed to love. The defense during this case tried to convince you that Mrs. Stephens was a helpless abused wife. Let me ask you, is Mrs. Stephens helpless when she was able fire a gun and put three bullet holes in her husband? And how is she helpless when she was given many opportunities to escape from her husband for her safety and her children’s safety?
Partisanship and Misconceptions Introduction The saying “the pen is mightier than the sword” is widely known and referenced. However, contrary to popular belief, actions may speak louder than words. This rings true in the case of Michelle Carter, this specific case has been a reoccurring debate, in terms of whether Michelle Carter should be found guilty or not guilty for the death of her boyfriend, Conrad Roy III.
Right when she killed him she put the lambs leg in the oven to cook. She killed him because he wanted to break up with her but the wife was mad and upset about him leaving her for an other woman. She made it look like some one else killed him and called the police. The police asked her question about the husband death but all she said that she found him dead. She ask the detective to turn off the oven and take out the lambs leg.
As mentioned before regarding the movie “The Rainmaker,” we take on the part of a defence lawyer who has to defend Rudy Baylor, a lawyer who just graduated from law school. The case regards self defence against Kelly Riker’s husband who tried attacking him because of jealousy. Secondly, we defend Kelly Riker, who’s a battered wife that wasn’t capable of leaving her abusive relationship from being frightened of being killed. The reason we defend her is that she took the blame upon her for the killing of her husband to safe Rudy Baylor. As a defence lawyer, from the facts, drowned out from Rudy Baylor’s self-response, one must identify its reactions as self defence and not be found guilty.