The Murder Case Of Jennifer Jackson Essay

The Murder Case of Jennifer Jackson: Article Analysis

The case that I decided to analyze was one about an 18 year old girl who was convicted of killing her mother, but nine years later her case was overturned because of evidence that was withheld from her trial. According to Emily Bazelon from the New York Times Magazine (2017),Noura Jackson made a 9-11 call at 5 am crying out that about someone breaking into her home, and that her mother was bleeding and not breathing. According to police reports, Noura Jackson came home from a long night of partying to see her mother stabbed fifty times to death, and lying in a pool of her own blood (Bazelon,2017). When the police took on the case, they found that Jennifer was a single mother who lived

Noura then came home around 5am to find her mom dead. This case went to prosecutor Amy Weirich who was considered to be a high- risk trial lawyer and on her way to be the first woman deputy attorney in Shelby county (bazelon,2017). Weirich suspected that Noura killed her mother for her 1.5 million dollar estate and life insurance, so she could keep partying. Police arrested Noura a few weeks after the murder, and the Prosecutor was pushing for a life sentence. Although Weirich had no forensic evidence against Naura, she had many people come out and testify about her “party ways”. One crucial testimony came from a boy named Andrew who claimed that Noura called him around the time of the murder, and asked to meet Naura at her home.When the defense asked Andrew if this was normal, Andrew replied “No”. Andrew believed Noura just needed him for a cover-up,so they would find the body together. Another crucial piece of evidence that got Noura convicted was a cut on her hand, and at four in the morning of the murder she didn’t tell the police that she went to walgreens to buy bandages for her cut, before coming home to see the murder scene. February

In my opinion, this article did a great job explaining the criminal justice process, and how the prosecution hindered some of Noura’s rights. Bazelon even went through Brady V Maryland, and wrote on the history of the 5th amendment going back to the 1792. If I would give Emily Bazelon two suggestions, the first would be to talk more about the jury. The Jury played an extensive role in this case. They are the ones who found Noura guilty without any forensic evidence. The second suggestion I would give Emily Bazelon, would be to be a little less biased. In my opinion, I felt like she was leaning more towards painting the Prosecutor Weirich as a bad person, and questioned her motives. In the criminal justice system, it’s important to be neutral and