INTRODUCTION
At the end of the trial, if the judge finds the evidence is strong enough, they will decide that the accused is guilty. But before the judge give the sentence, DPP will tell the court why the sentence should be heavy. This is where the DPP will invite the witness to talk about their suffering because of the crime, in court. If you don’t want to speak in court, then you can also prepare a statement to be read out in court by the DPP or a family member. This statement is called the Victim Impact Statement (VIS).
VIS can be defined as an oral or written statement provided by a victim concerning the impact of a specific crime. The VIS is to allow the person or persons directly affected by the crime to address the court during the
…show more content…
The first case, Booth v. Maryland, was decided in 1987. John Booth was convicted of killing Irvin and Rose Bronstein during a robbery in their home. In this case, John Booth and Willie Reed bound and gagged an elderly couple. Believing that the couple might be able to identify them, Booth stabbed them numerous times with a kitchen knife. The trial judge allowed the jury to consider a VIS that detailed the family’s and the community’s resect and admiration for the victims as well as the impact of the murder on the victim’s family. The Supreme Court reversed the death sentence and held that it was impermissible to allow the jury access to such evidence in the sentencing phase of a death penalty proceeding. The court listed three factors that precluded the prosecution from introducing evidence of homicide’s impact on the victim’s family. Firstly, in holding that VIS impermissibility allows the jury to focus on the victim rather than the Defendant. The Court was particularly moved by the fact that the capital defendant does not typically choose his or her victim and in fixing punishment, there should be no correlation between the murder and the grief experienced by the victim’s family. Secondly, the Court held that the sentence of death should not turn on the characteristics of the victim and the victim’s family. Finally, the Court stated that because a VIS contains the subjective perceptions and feeling of family members, the defendant has limited rebuttal
Statement of the Case: This part has the summary of the dispute, and what happened in the lower court and present court by the time that the brief was filed. Also, this part provides important facts and a word by word recall of the case (Statsky, pg. 545).
Stevens, Mark. (2000). Victim Impact Statements Considered in Sentencing. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law, 2(1), 3. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1071&context=bjcl
One of the most intense group task experiences in the United States is that of serving on the jury of a death penalty case. This forces a group of complete strangers to come together and determine the fate of another’s human beings life. The court case of the State of Ohio v Mark Ducic, was of no exception. Ducic a 47 year old drug addict white male, was accused of committing a double homicide. In accordance with Ohio state law, murdering more than one individual is considered a mass murder and therefore the accused is subject to the possibility of the death penalty. Ducic’s victims included Barbara Davis, his domestic partner and drug addict, as well as a drug user that Ducic was an acquaintance with. The death of Davis was at first believed to be due to an overdose, but police informants identified Ducic’s voice on a recording claiming that he killed her. The other victim, the drug addict, was thought to be eliminated by Ducic for fear that he would inform the police that he killed Davis. Investigators believed that Ducic gave both victims a deathly amount of drugs that would make it appear as though they both simply overdosed. Ducic was found guilty on both occasions, yet a second trial in regards to his sentencing had to occur and another hearing had to be conducted on whether or not to remove the death penalty.
Other Variables: Gender and Political Affiliation Lastly, we examined the effects of the participant’s gender and political attitudes. Each factor was treated as a fourth independent variable in an ANOVA. There were no main effects but a significant interaction was observed between the independent variables being jury gender, the race of the victim, perspective taking and victim impact statements and the dependent variable being the empathy for the defendant with F(1,107) = 6.879, p = 0.010.
On September 12th, Carmela Buhbut, a battered wife who shot her husband to death 31 times from a close range, was sentenced to seven years imprisonment. She then appealed to the Supreme Court against the severity of the sentence. No less than three different justices held the complicated appeal- Bach, Kedmi and Dorner. All three of them, agreed that there is no doubt, that taking a person’s life is a crime which Buhbut should be punished for. However, only of them, justice Kedmi, thought the appeal should be dismiss in limine.
This paper will examine the pros and cons of the death penalty. Is it a deterrent or is that a myth. Does it give the family of the victim peace or does it cause them to suffer waiting for appeal after appeal. What are the forms of execution and any evidence of them being cruel and usual punishment. Is the death penalty fair if there are glaring, disparities in sentencing depending on geographic location and the color of the offender and victim’s skin?
This paper will provide a brief overview of the case, giving the events that lead up to the murder and the court appearances that followed. The original verdict will also be discussed and how it leads to the final verdict of the case. This paper will furthermore discuss the defense that was used and the reasoning behind
This assignment will identify the strengths and weaknesses regarding the fundamentals of the interviewing, and whether the seven stages in the interview sequence were properly used by the detective in film Interviewing victims and witnesses. Many Successful victim and witness interviews use foundational knowledge to explore and evaluate the role of six key factors and seven stages have in successful interviews. I will carefully examine the effectiveness of the structure that was used by the detective, and identify the presence of proxemics, micro-skills involved in listening, the development of rapport, and possible barriers to communication.
The jury in trying to let the defendant go considered if there were any circumstances that would provide say as a self-defense claim to justify this horrific crime of murder of two people named Mr. Stephan Swan and Mr. Mathew Butler. Throughout the guilt/innocent phase, the jury believes not to have heard convincing evidence the victims were a threat to the defendant nor a sign the defendant was in fear for his life before he took the victims’ lives.
The victim's ability to convey emotion to the court allows for the effect of the offender's actions on the community to be brought to attention, allowing the sentence increasingly reflect the communities response to the crime and achieve the sentencing outcomes of just punishment and community protection (victims support agency, 2009). Despite fears that a VIS may result in a disproportionately harsh sentences, research suggests that VIS allow for the court to be more proportionate. After the introduction of VIS in South Australia, studies did not reveal any significant increase in sentence length or prison sentence as a result of a VIS (victims support agency, 2009). Findings also suggest that judges find VIS useful in deciding the amount of retribution to sentence the defendant to. A victim support agency (2009) study found that in Australia, two-thirds of judges felt that there were certain offences where a VIS was a useful source of information in sentencing, including physical and sexual
Simpson murder trial, there are a couple of things that piqued my interests. One was the notorious car chase down the Los Angeles freeway in a white Ford Bronco driven by AL Cowlings with O.J. Simpson hiding in the back. Robert Shapiro was supposed to surrender his client to the Los Angeles Police Department, but instead it is my opinion that O. J. Simpson lawyers and friends came up with a plan to get publicity and supporters. The second was the most crucial point of the trial is when O.J. Simpson squeeze his hand into the leather glove that was linked to the killings. This led to the famous argument by Johnnie Cochran “If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” As the years passed by many untold stories are revealed. A recent new documentary states that “Simpson had stop talking his arthritis medicine two weeks” in advance so his hands would be swollen to persuade the jury of his innocents.
This paper seeks to examine the purpose and process of the probable cause hearing. Probable cause is what determines if there is sufficient reason based on known facts that a crime has been committed (Worrall, 2017). For example, in the case of Virginia v. Moore (2008), the respondent Moore was stopped by Virginia Police for driving
Eaton, Judy, Tony Christensen. “Closure and its myths: Victims’ families, the death penalty, and the closure argument.” International Review of Victimology, Vol 20(3).Sep, 2014. : pp. 327-343.
It was midnight when it all happened. Tom Peterson was sleeping in bed next to his wife after a tiring day at work, while his two little daughters slept in the next room. Suddenly he was violently awakened by the terrified screams of his wife only to get a glance of a huge man standing over him with a butcher's knife. Tom was stabbed thirteen times, one of his daughters was killed and his wife was severely injured. Now, the Peterson family has just exited the supreme court of justice in which the judge has condemned the murderer of their little girl to the death penalty, for as it turns out the Peterson family had not been the first victim of this murderer.
Secondly, many believe that capital punishment is right because of the justice given to the victim’s family. These family members feel l...