The Hill v. Ohio County involves a wrongful death case in which the hospital refused to admit Juanita Monroe. She thought she was in labor. As a result, she delivered her child at home without medical attention and died shortly after giving birth. The plaintiff was Lorene Hill, administer of Monroe’s estate, against Ohio Country Hospital. The question arises whether there was a breach of duty by the hospital in accordance to the institution’s admission policy.
On June 13, 1901, two members of one of Montreal’s wealthiest families were both shot and killed. Ada Mills Redpath, widow of the late industrialist John James Redpath, and her son Jocelyn Clifford Redpath were found dying and unresponsive in the former’s bedroom. Two pistols were found at the scene alongside three spent bullets, two lodged in Ada’s backside and one embedded in Clifford’s forehead. Interestingly, the family has remained very secretive about the entire incident; the case was hushed up and only revealed to the authorities by accident. However, by sorting and weighing the value of the limited contradictory and biased evidence available, it becomes clear that the deaths were not a result of suicide intervention, epileptic insanity,
It was questioned if the killings of the supervisor and Mayor were premeditated. Also if the defendant had a mental condition, that prevented him from knowing right from wrong. In particular if he could he be diagnosed with a mental condition. That could possibly keep him from standing trial, and sent to a mental institution. The defendant was found to be depressed but not clinically depressed.
(2) Another of many questions about this death is whether or not Sandra Bland was suicidal before this arrest. On the mental health questionnaire filled out by the sheriff’s office a deputy marked “yes” to the question, “Have you ever attempted suicide?” Yet, on the computerized summary of her intake “No” was marked in response to “attempted suicide.” (3) These forms raise the questions of who really filled out these forms and when?
In the article “2 Men Awarded $750,000 for Wrongful Convictions in 1983 Murder” was about two half brothers who were wrongly convicted for a crime they didn’t commit. The men have been awarded with $50,000 a year, up to $750,000 for each of the men. Even though it may seem like a lot at first after attorney’s fees, the cost of living, and family members it’s not a lot. After 31 years in prison, their compensation would be more than double that amount, if they had not been in prison. The men had been convicted for the rape and murder of an 11 year old in 1983, even though there was physical evidence that either of them had been involved.
g room sprawled out on the couch. She then called for her maid, Bridget. Soon after, a neighbor, Alice Russell, came over to comfort Lizzie. The neighbor ended up finding Abby Borden's body upstairs in one of the family’s bedrooms. Abby was said to be killed first, about ninety minutes before Andrew.
Shockingly, as the top headline of the news spread worldwide, the world came in silence when Caylee’s skeletal remains were found on December 11, 2008 that were found with a blanket inside of a trash bag in a wooded area near the family home (Death of Caylee Anthony”). After recovering all of Caylee’s remains, investigators gave reports and a trial testimony explaining the duct tape that was found at the front of the skull and on the mouth of the skull. During the trial, the medical examiner explained that the duct tape was the main reason as to why Caylee’s murder was ruled as a homicide. The court trial lasted six weeks from May to July of 2011, the investigation and testimonies was a very important role in this case. Of course, the prosecution sought the death penalty since Casey murdered her daughter by administering chloroform and applying duct tape to her mouth and head.
Was this a desperate man's attempt to escape death or a calculated maneuver to escape authority. The case as seen through
Innocent people who are incriminated under improper evidence are hanged. Parallel in the McMartin day care abuse case, the McMartin family, who administrate the establishment, and other members are accused illegally of having abused sexually numerously of the children under their vigilance. The accusations used against the McMartin
Science has come a long way over the years. It has helped countless every day struggles and cure diseases most commonly found. What you don’t hear about however is the advancement of forensic science. Forensic science has helped solve countless cases of murder, rape, and sexual assault. In the case of John Joubert, it helped solve the murders of three young boys with one small piece of evidence that linked him directly to the crime.
In a murder case where an 18-year-old, Sarah Johnson was sentenced to life in prison for committing a first degree murder for both her and dad. The case reopened when a retired crime lab technician Michael Howard “testified that whoever shot Diane and Alan Johnson at close range on September 2, 2003, would have been hit by a "rain" of blood spatter” (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/03/johnson/index.html?eref=sitesearch). Howard came up with his theories proving that, Sarah was not even close in committing those murders and it is a wrongful conviction. Based on blood spatter, Howard disclosed that the shooting which took place was at a very close range and blood would have been all over the assailant, where as there was no blood pattern found on Sarah’s clothes. In fact, the pajama pant, Sarah was wearing on the day of shooting had no trace of her parent’s DNA or blood.
Assisted suicide is a rather controversial issue in contemporary society. When a terminally ill patient formally requests to be euthanized by a board certified physician, an ethical dilemma arises. Can someone ethically end the life of another human being, even if the patient will die in less than six months? Unlike traditional suicide, euthanasia included multiple individuals including the patient, doctor, and witnesses, where each party involved has a set of legal responsibilities. In order to understand this quandary and eventually reach a conclusion, each party involved must have their responsibilities analyzed and the underlying guidelines of moral ethics must be investigated.
Pamela Foddrill: Examining the Investigation Introduction The tragic abduction and death of Pamela Foddrill beginning on August 18th, 1995, relied on investigators from the Indiana State Police, FBI, multiple Greene County police agencies, and Greene County Prosecutors to arrest and convict the five individuals who committed this heinous act. Those who were arrested and eventually convicted for different criminal offenses are Roger Long, Jerry Russell Sr., John Redman, Wanda Hubbell, and Plynia Fowler. One could look at the investigations these agencies completed and evaluate them in two phases, forensic evidence and investigative processes.
The judge declares the “Murder in the first degree—premeditated homicide—is the most serious charge tried in our criminal courts. One man is dead. The life of another is at stake. If there is a reasonable doubt in your minds as to the guilt of the accused … then you must declare him not guilty. If, however, there is no reasonable doubt, then he must be found guilty.
This was quite the battle for Adnan Syed, a young oriental male who was accused of murdering his long-time girlfriend in January of 1999. Hae-Min Lee, Adnan’s girlfriend, went missing in January and her body was found buried in a local park 3 weeks later. Adnan Syed is innocent of killing Hae-Min Lee because of three reasons: Cristina Gutierrez, Adnan’s lawyer, failed to put him in a position to win the trial, Jay is not an effective witness, and the window of time does not match up. Adnan is not at fault
