Bath, N.Y. (WENY) -- In a few days Thomas Clayton will be sentenced for his role in orchestrating his wife 's death. However on Thursday, the attorney for the convicted murderer made his first motion for a new trial. Thomas Clayton appeared in a dark green prison jumpsuit, shackled at his hands and feet, as his attorney Ray Schlather argued against the expert testimony of cell phone analyst Sy Ray. Schalther said the jury got it wrong
Judge Let Charges Against Police Stand in Freddie Gray Death A hearing was held on Wednesday to determine if the charges against the six officers should be dropped or not. The charges brought against the six officers were not dismissed by the circuit court judge. The defense lawyers filed a request to have the state attorney; Marilyn J. Mosby removed off the case. The charge was prosecutorial misconduct which was not proven.
However, when the jury selection process of his trial was underway, the State used peremptory challenges to strike every black prospective juror that was qualified- four to be exact. This selection process had two phases-
This also required that a new trial be conducted with the advantage and constitutional right of legal counsel appointed by the court. Justice Sutherland proceeded to state that no attempt was made to investigate the trial, that the trial was rushed, and the defendants had no time to prepare a case. The majority of the United States Supreme Court concluded that a defendant, who is charged with a serious as well as heinous crime, must not be omitted of his constitutional right to have ample time to discuss and prepare his
The death of Meriwether Lewis still remains a great mystery. For 200 years, it was claimed to be a suicide, but many other sources of evidence proves this wrong. He was secretary for Thomas Jefferson. He was also the number one hero in the country. He was even named the governor of Louisiana!
Following the Grand Jury’s decision, Stewart said, “While much of the attention has been on
(OPRIAIGC 5) This caused the grand jury to return the two superseding indictments (Randy and Kevin) due to each being linked to Conspiracy count. To add to this when the Grand Jury was questioned about the death of Vicki Weaver, “the U.S. Attorney mistakenly advised them that the matter was not within their jurisdiction... We found that he later failed to correct this error. ” (OPRIAIGC 6).
"Don 't judge a book by its cover" is a famous saying that some of us heard it before and some of us experienced it. 12 jurors were experiencing this quote when they gathered to decide whether a young boy is guilty by killing his father or not. Juror 2 stated, "Well, anyway, I think he was guilty" (6). Juror 2 represent most of us, as sometimes we judge from what we hear and not from what we see. The 12 jurors are from various backgrounds and each one has a distinctive personality.
he Dred Scott decision of 1857 was a significant decision made by the U.S. Supreme Court that declared that blacks, regardless of whether they were free or a slave, had no legal standing because they were not American citizens. The decision was not the first to be made regarding Dred Scott; a Missouri jury ruled in Scott 's favour when Scott claimed that his residence in Illinois and Wisconsin made him free, but the state supreme court ruled against him, which lead to the case being escalated to the US Supreme Court. The US Supreme Court ruled against Scott 7-2. The Dred Scott decision is considered a landmark decision and is indicative of the tumultuous political climate of the time.
The results of these informal practices only proved that the accused wasn't guilty because the arguments were not valid enough to incriminate him. Leadership did emerge differently from a small group setting because a designated leader should not let a group member overtake his position. So Juror #8 as a initiator should have never tried to take the position of Juror #1. But it was needed for him to do that so that the group could reach into a correct decision. If Juror #8 wouldn't have voiced his opinion then maybe this innocent young men could have been acquitted.
A group of juror comprising of 12 men from diverse backgrounds began their early deliberations with 11 of ‘guilty’ and 1 of ‘not guilty’ verdicts. Juror 8 portrayed himself as a charismatic and high self-confident architect. Initially, Juror 1 who played the foreman positioned himself as self-appointed leader of the team in which has led his authority to be challenged as his leadership style lacked in drive and weak. In the contrary, Juror 8 is seen as the emergent leader considering his openness to probing conversations while remaining calm. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking.
This is an important element when deciding who the best and worst jurors were. There were no facts as to who was right or wrong because we didn’t see the crime in question. All
The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar
These people are dangerous and don’t need big reason to kill someone.(This is an example of Prejudice too) Perception Discussion of elevated train (0:18:05) Could hear the argument (0:19:24) Discussion of lady's testimony (1:21:21) In all three situations Jurors organizes the information and translates it into something meaningful and comes to conclusion which results into making others to switch their vote from guilty to not guilty.. Representativeness heuristic "
This essay will briefly discuss the role of the jury and how it works, from the principle behind it, to the method with which members are selected, and to the powers available to jurors. Moreover, it will outline advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury, and it will point out a couple of ways which could ameliorate this type of trial. Trial by jury has been a part of the criminal justice system since the 12th century (Davies, 2015), it is considered an ancient right and a symbol of liberty (Hostettler, 2004). It creates no precedent and it can decide challenging cases equitably without making bad law, it also brings members of the public into the administration of justice and into an understanding of legal and human rights (Hostettler,
