John Giglio was charged with passing forged money orders and sentenced to five years imprisonment. During the appeal, Giglio counsel discovered new evidence representing that the prosecutors had failed to reveal a promise made to its “key witness” that he wouldn’t be prosecuted if he testified for the government. The Court granted a certiorari to determine whether the evidence not revealed would require a retrial under the due process standards Napue v. Illinoi, 360 U.S. 264 (1959), and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). Evidence showed at trial, representatives at Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co. learned that Robert Taliento, key witness and co-conspirator, was a banker teller and also had cashed several forged money orders. He confessed to providing Giglio with a customer’s bank signature card used by John Giglio to forge $2,300 in money orders.
The author looks at the time period that the three were released and discusses the reason for their release, which is Alford plea. In this case, the defendant is voluntarily forced to plead guilty while still proclaiming his or her innocence. The author also looks at the evidence and ends up concluding that that there was little evidence that linked the defendants to the murder. In addition, the author criticizes the state’s government for forcing the men to plead guilty. Using another case, the author looks into this matter by examining the flaws related to the Alford’s plea.
Introduction The book that I selected is called “Getting Life” by Michael Morton, who is a man that was wrongfully convicted of killing his wife in Texas in 1986. This book takes us from a happy young couple to the day of the murder, through the investigation into his wife’s murder, Michael’s trial and conviction, 25 years in prison, appeals, release from prison, and reintegration into society. One unique fact about this case is that is the first case where the prosecutor in a wrongful conviction case was subsequently convicted of prosecutorial misconduct, stripped of their law license and sentenced to serve time in jail.
In the trial of the four Norfolk sailors, the main reason why they were all convicted was not the proclaimed evidence that wasn’t on the scene, but was the confessions that they were coerced to say during the interrogations. There was virtually no evidence against the four sailors, but the jury sided that they were all guilty. The major problem during the trial was that no evidence was found at the crime scene and the prosecution only badgered the four sailors based on confessions that they were threatened to say or else they
This paper will consist of an analysis of the case presented in the podcast Serial. The podcast Serial is based on a first degree murder case in Baltimore, Maryland, USA that took place on January 13th, 1999. The case consisted of Adnan Syed, a 17-year-old Muslim boy attending his final year of high school being charged with the first degree murder of his 17-year-old ex-girlfriend Hae Min Lee. 16 years later, Adnan is adamant that he did not commit the crime, however he is still serving a life sentence for her death. In relation to the case, alibi believability, polygraphs, psychopathy, interrogations, inconsistencies within Jay’s story and confessions will be discussed throughout this paper.
Confession might seem imprudent to a suspect who is sure of his own innocence. In many cases, the confessor would mourn in tears for the court and town’s
3. Do the officers’ fairness weigh in favor of a voluntary confession when they interrogated Ryker using threats and intimidating language? II. Brief Answers No.
Is it better to assume a man is guilty based on stereotypes and prejudice? Evidence must be substantial and confessions must never be forced or excessive. All evidence must be legally obtained, but sometimes things don’t happen the way they are supposed to. For in May of 1993, unspeakable acts rocked the community of West Memphis, Arkansas. Three boys would go on an innocent bike ride and never return, and three older boys were blamed.
10 year old boy is on trial for murder. The essential question here is; can pride be a destructive force? In this case, yes. It is only logical that Doodle’s brother is responsible for his death. There is plenty evidence as to why Brother is guilty.
Another prisoner at the jail said Miguel confessed to him and he testified for a reduced sentence (Cameron). This shows the prisoner lied to get a reduced sentence. 15% of wrongful convictions had another prisoner confessed against the victim (Cameron). The author states this to show how prisoners will lie for reduced sentences and plea deals. In the modern era of the death penalty, Around half of the death row inmates who have been wrongfully convicted have been convicted by prison informants (Balko).
For the past two decades, “The Innocence Project” with the help of updated science methods have worked relentlessly to get innocent people out of prison. Through DNA testing, they have been able to find new evidence that have freed hundreds of prisoners who were wrongfully convicted. Other factors such as eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, government misconduct, and inadequate defense also played keys roles in the wrongful convictions. The case that I would I would like to highlight today is that of, Johnnie Lindsey. Johnnie Lindsey was a 30-year old laundry worker who was falsely accused of rape.
Wrongful convictions are a problem that most government officials won’t admit. The United States and other countries such as Australia have been susceptible to these miscarriages of justice. This can arise from a snowball effect of scenarios such as witness misidentification, perjured testimonies, coercive methods of interrogation, prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective counsel. These are some of the reasons that can potentially lead innocent people to be convicted of crimes they did not commit. The thousands of exonerations in the United States has caused concern for other nations to reevaluate their criminal justice system.
If only society had a better view point, confession of crimes might have been easier than it is now. Millions of people would not be in their homes contemplating on the mistakes they did twenty years
Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong In Brandon L. Garrett 's book, Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong, he makes it very clear how wrongful convictions occur and how these people have spent many years in prison for crimes they never committed. Garrett presents 250 cases of innocent people who were convicted wrongfully because the prosecutors opposed testing the DNA of those convicted. Garrett provided simple statistics such as graphs, percentages, and charts to help the reader understand just how great of an impact this was.
1) In the allegory of the cave, Plato’s main goal is to illustrate his view of knowledge. A group of prisoners have been chained in a cave their whole lives and all they have ever been exposed to were shadows on the wall and voices of people walking by. The prisoners in the cave represent humans who only pay attention to the physical aspects of the world (sight and sound). Once one of them escapes and sees the blinding light, all he wants is to retreat back to the cave and return to his prior way of living. This shows that Plato believes enlightenment and education are painful, but the pain is necessary for enlightenment and it is worth it.
