Now, to the layman, that appears simply to be a frame up – when you arrest and charge and find the evidence subsequently. To make matters worse, when we examine the manner in which that evidence was put forward by the prosecution (a matter for which the director of Public Prosecutions must be held responsible), we find some startling inconsistencies, strange and frightening things. Like one man giving three statements. – two of them before Arnold Rampersaud was arrested, never mentioning the accused or anything to do with the accused. A third statement made after he had been arrested conveniently mentions the accused. We recall that at the last trial, these three statements were withheld from the defence; they were not allowed to be perused …show more content…
I will bring to your attention a small piece from yesterday’s CHRONICLE – an article under the headline “Ballistics Expert in Witness box”. Now I am not quoting the CHRONICLE as a source of truth. One has gotten so accustomed to the complete misinformation, the deliberate distortion, the vast omissions of this newspaper. One has gotten so accustomed to its pronouncing that there ae no shortages, and the next day changing its mind and talking about shortages. One has gotten to be so accustomed to its being the largest agricultural producer in the country, producing bumper rice crops every day until we find that there is no rice, no boosie. We have to import. One has gotten so accustomed to these inconsistencies. I’m not quoting it as a standard of truth, but I’m quoting it as an indication of the way that the system is thinking, and the manner in which they would like to mislead the …show more content…
A very simple statement, but it seems to me that one must interpret it as being very deliberately injected into this article, and injected to mislead. Now, what is the implication of the term “a mixed jury” in our context in Guyana? It would seem that the newspaper is attempting to suggest that the conditions under which the trial is taking place, and the fundamental condition relating to a jury, are such that the accused can expect a fair trial because he has a mixed jury – which you would expect to mean average, no particular bias, no special prejudice against the accused. Let me tell you how this mixed jury s composed. There are three pretty Indian ladies in the jury. There is one pretty African lady in the jury. There is one individual (male) who looks like a dougla, and there are seven strapping African brothers in the jury. Now this is the mixed jury. Seven male Afro-Guyanese, black men in other words, one dougla, three Indian girls, one African girl. This is the mixed jury. Now, in our context, in our society, with the racial antagonisms from which we Guyanese suffer, can tis mixed jury really be considered the peers of the accused? This mixed Georgetown jury, and we must remember the ingredients of the mixture, is going to be asked to make judgements, day after day, about matters that have arisen out of
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
The defence argued that because the detention was unlawful, any arrest or search that flows from the detention should be regarded and was similarly unlawful. The Crown referred to common law power of arrest and search. As of R.v,Caslake’s case, it clearly stated that in the situation of an arrest, it is generally permitted that upon lawful arrest, police have the power to search a person for officer safety reason as well where there is “some reasonable prospect of securing evidence of the offence for which the accused is being arrested” and to secure that evidence. However, in the situation of Mr.Nanokeesic’s detention it is considered to be unlawful. The police did not have grounds to suspect that Mr.Nankeesic had provided a false name to them, as well, the fact that Mr.Nanokeesic ran
As if being the father of two children and a dedicated husband were not enough, Victor Terhune has to balance his family life with his job. Victor currently works as a Technical representative for the sales department at Weastec in Dublin, Ohio. Though work holds him back from doing some of the things that he would like to be doing, like spending more time with his wife and sons, this is a common theme for many workers today in a relationship with their desire to be with their families. Victor strives to get resolution to this by making time by driving home right after work and focusing on that quality time with his family.
State the title of the article, the name of the publication in which it appeared and the date of publication.
Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then separating them into smaller groups to be seated in the jury box. The judge and or attorneys ask questions with intent to determine if any juror is biased or cannot deal with the issues fairly. The question process is referred to as voir dire, a French word meaning, “to see to speak”. During voir dire, attorneys have the right to excuse a juror in peremptory challenges. Peremptory challenges are based on the potential juror admitting bias, acquaintanceship with one of the parties, personal knowledge of the facts, or the attorney believing he/she might not be impartial. In the case of Batson v. Kentucky, James Batson, a black man, was indicted for second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the selection of the jury the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike out all of the four black potential jurors, leaving an all white jury. Batson’s attorney moved to discharge the venire, the list from which jurors may be selected, on the grounds that the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges violated his client’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury derived from a “cross-section of the community”(People v. Wheeler, 583 P.3d 748 [Calif. 1978]). The circuit court ruled in favor of the prosecutor and convicted Batson on both counts. This case went through the courts and finalized in the U.S. Supreme Court.
This decision requires that unless a suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning anything he says may not be introduced in a court of law.
The first vote ended with eleven men voting guilty and one man not guilty. We soon learn that several of the men voted guilty since the boy had a rough background not because of the facts they were presented with. Although numerous jurors did make racist or prejudice comments, juror ten and juror three seemed to be especially judgmental of certain types of people. Juror three happened to be intolerant of young men and stereotyped them due to an incident that happened to his son. In addition, the third juror began to become somewhat emotional talking about his son, showing his past experience may cloud his judgment. Juror ten who considered all people from the slums “those people” was clearly prejudiced against people from a different social background. Also, Juror ten stated in the beginning of the play “You 're not going to tell us that we 're supposed to believe that kid, knowing what he is. Listen, I 've lived among 'em all my life. You can 't believe a word they say. I mean, they 're born liars.” Juror ten did not respect people from the slums and believed them to all act the same. As a result, Juror ten believed that listening to the facts of the case were pointless. For this reason, the tenth juror already knew how “those people” acted and knew for sure the boy was not innocent. Even juror four mentioned just how the slums are a “breeding ground
Throughout this book, author Robert Welch demonstrates values of compassion, caution, and knowledge. These values interweave in Welch’s explanations of how the healthcare system of this country has so much money invested in it, and yet, manage patients receive so little care. This country has a healthcare system that is currently operating out of a broken model that does not place value on individual health, but on profit incentive.
...ing of key evidence he was not found guilty. This goes to prove that although in this case Morin was ultimately found not guilty, there are other cases where the person who is actually responsible for the crime has been released for the same reasons. In this case the actual person who murdered Christine has not been found, although had the police widened their suspect list they may have found the murderer.
The officers tampered with evidence and made a false discovery that he was the person and that is how he was convicted (Innocent Project N.D.). Many forensic methods have been implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or nothing to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011).
Juror #10, a garage owner, segregates and divides the world stereotypically into ‘us’ and ‘them.’ ‘Us’ being people living around the rich or middle-class areas, and ‘them’ being people of a different race, or possessing a contrasting skin color, born and raised in the slums (poorer parts of town). It is because of this that he has a bias against the young man on trial, for the young man was born in the slums and was victim to domestic violence since the age of 5. Also, the boy is of a Hispanic descent and is of a different race than this juror, making him fall under the juror’s discriminatory description of a criminal. This is proven on when juror #10 rants: “They don’t need any real big reason to kill someone, either. You know, they get drunk, and bang, someone’s lying in the gutter… most of them, it’s like they have no feelings (59).
The jury system has evolved from a representation of all white men to both men and women from very diverse backgrounds. This is important if one is going to be tried in his/her community of peers.
Butler was one of many to be accused of a crime he didn’t commit. In 1993, a woman got
...lice or lawyers used their integrity. The police skirted around the law and use evidence that the witnesses said was not correct. They had a description of the suspect that did not match Bloodsworth but, they went after him as well. They also used eyewitness testimony that could have been contaminated.
This is one of the most important aspects of the criminal investigation process due to the fact that if the proper procedures aren’t followed, the validity of the case will be jeopardized. The Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW) outlines the conditions of which a person can be arrested and detained. A key term in the arresting process is ‘suspicion on reasonable grounds’ as this describes the discretion of the police in making arrests. Although for most arrests, a warrant is needed, police can arrest someone if they genuinely believe that the person is guilty of a crime. After a person has been arrested, they will be detained in a police station and this process is also outlined in the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW). The Act outlines the rights a person who has been detained, such as refreshment periods, and the procedures that the police must follow, this is all done to help protect the rights of citizens. If a person is charged with a crime, they will either be put in remand or be allowed to post bail. Bail, also referred to as conditional freedom, allows a person to retain certain rights, such as spend their time awaiting trial in their home, and this is outlined in the Bail Act 1978 (NSW). Bail is a great example in the criminal trial process achieving justice, as the concept of bail seeks to