In the excerpt from King Lear by William Shakespeare, Lear states that there is a relationship between one’s wealth and justice; where the richer are given more leniency when it comes to justice, while those who are not as wealthy receive less grace from the law. Lear argues that the wealthy are virtually above the law when tried for a crime, while the poor are unfairly tried and even receive the harshest of punishments. Though there have been many cases of many celebrities and million-dollar bigwigs being found guilty and lawfully punished, there have been many other cases where they do not receive proper justice and have been acquitted of the most heinous of crimes. One of the most famous cases of the mid-nineties (and possibly one of the most controversial) of the wealthy being above the law is the O.J. Simpson trial, who fatally stabbed his ex-wife Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. Being accused of murder, the court had sufficient biological and psychological evidence to prove Simpson’s act of murder. However, Simpson was found not guilty by the jury and lives as a fre...
Debated as one of the most misrepresented cases in American legal history, Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald still fights for innocence. Contrary to infallible evidence, prosecution intentionally withheld crucial information aiding MacDonald’s alibi. Such ratification included proof of an outside attack that would have played a major role in Jeffrey’s case.
“Corruption is like a ball of snow, once it’s set a rolling it must increase (Charles Caleb Colton).” Colton describes that once corruption has begun, it is difficult to stop. Corruption has existed in this country, let alone this very planet, since the beginning of time. With corruption involves: money, power, and favoritism. Many people argue today that racism is still a major problem to overcome in today’s legal system. American author (and local Chicago resident) Steve Bogira jumps into the center of the United States justice system and tells the story of what happens in a typical year for the Cook Country Criminal Courthouse, which has been noted as one of the most hectic and busiest felony courthouses in the entire country. After getting permission from one of the courthouse judges’ (Judge Locallo) he was allowed to venture in and get eyewitness accounts of what the American Legal System is and how it operates. Not only did he get access to the courtroom but: Locallo’s chambers, staff, even his own home. In this book we get to read first hand account of how America handles issues like: how money and power play in the court, the favoritism towards certain ethnic groups, and the façade that has to be put on by both the defendants and Cook County Workers,
This is an example of a woman, Sarah Osbourne, put on trial for no apparent reason, other than the fact that she had inherited a good amount of money, and people were talking. People still found a way to accuse her for an invalid
The double murder case of O.J. Simpson is one that will live on forever and one that will never be forgotten. On June 12, 1994 Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman were found dead at Nicole’s home in Los Angeles. According to Doug Linder, it was “most likely a single male that came through the back entrance of Nicole Brown Simpson’s condominium” (Linder). Since they did not have any other suspects they went right to Orenthal James Simpson who was Nicole Simpson’s ex-husband. Law enforcement had seen him as suspicious and they had charged him with both of the murders. The case had gone to trial and it was the prosecutor’s job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Simpson was guilty and that he had done the crime. Simpson had what was called
Garrett, Brandon. Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2011. 86. Print.
The New York Times bestseller book titled Reasonable Doubts: The Criminal Justice System and the O.J. Simpson Case examines the O.J. Simpson criminal trial of the mid-1990s. The author, Alan M. Dershowitz, relates the Simpson case to the broad functions and perspectives of the American criminal justice system as a whole. A Harvard law school teacher at the time and one of the most renowned legal minds in the country, Dershowitz served as one of O.J. Simpson’s twelve defense lawyers during the trial. Dershowitz utilizes the Simpson case to illustrate how today’s criminal justice system operates and relates it to the misperceptions of the public. Many outside spectators of the case firmly believed that Simpson committed the crimes for which he was charged for. Therefore, much of the public was simply dumbfounded when Simpson was acquitted. Dershowitz attempts to explain why the jury acquitted Simpson by examining the entire American criminal justice system as a whole.
OJ “The Juice” Simpson is clearly responsible for the tragic deaths of his wife Nicole Brown, and Ron Goldman.There are more than enough proof that suspect that the verdict of this should be reconsidered.The shoes print which were indeed Simpson’s,blood marks that were left on OJ’s car the blood spots left on his gloves,his suicide note.All of these were compelling facts that OJ was the murdered.However due to the miscarriage of justice Simpson was unfortunately found not guilty.Wealth played a major role for the conclusion of the verdict, OJ had a very good legal team that raised questions over much of the evidence and testimony against him. If the average person were charged of crimes that OJ has committed, he/she couldn't afford the lawyers and staff to mount the defense OJ could.
...e to realize the huge effect that the media had on the OJ Simpson Trial. Everything from the now infamous white bronco car chase to the glove scene is actually a prime example of how the media affected the public’s view of the trial. When the verdict for the case was finally read, (after the longest court case in California history), half of the United States population was watching. This shows the massive level of public interest in the case, as well as the effect that the allowing of cameras into the courtroom had. The decision to allow the cameras into the courtroom was a controversial decision. One must wonder if the allowing of the cameras for the OJ case had an effect on the decision to not allow cameras into the trial of the men accused of the September 11 bombings. Therefore, the O.J Simpson murder trial was the first biggest media trial that was conducted.
Hariman, R. “Performing the Laws: Popular Trials and Social Knowledge” from Popular Trials: Rhetoric, Mass Media, and the Law, Robert Hariman, ed(s)., University of Alabama Press, 1990. 17-30.
The Consequences of Decisions in King Lear by William Shakespeare King Lear is a detailed description of the consequences of one man's decisions. This fictitious man is Lear, King of England, who's decisions greatly alter his life and the lives of those around him. As Lear bears the status of King he is, as one expects, a man of great power but sinfully he surrenders all of this power to his daughters as a reward for their demonstration of love towards him. This untimely abdication of his throne results in a chain reaction of events that send him through a journey of hell. King Lear is a metaphorical description of one man's journey through hell in order to expiate his sin.
Fairchild, H. & Cowan, G (1997). Journal of Social Issues. The O.J. Simpson Trial: Challenges to Science and Society.
In the play Macbeth, many different major choices are brought forth to a certain character and the decision that is chosen affects the entire play. The results of these actions or decisions can be a positive or negative outcome towards the character. Does justice always prevail in the play Macbeth? If a character decides to commit a crime, will he/she be punished? If a character does a noble deed, will he/she be rewarded? As is represented in the play Macbeth, justice always prevails due to the guilty character's developing sense of remorse and/or the character receiving fair punishment. For every action there is a reaction and whatever the result is, it is meant to happen and it is just.
In Griffin v. Illinois, the late Justice Hugo L. Black wrote: "There can be no equal justice when the kind of trial a man gets depends on how much money he has in his pocket." If two suspects, one wealthy, one poor, are charged with a capital crime, the standard of justice changes. The rich defendant will post bail, preserve attorneys of choice, hire investigators and hire experts who will give psychiatric testimony for the defense. (Dispoldo, Nick.) The National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty (NCAB) wrote in its fact sheet “Death Penalty Overview: Ten Reasons Why Capital Punishment is Flawed Public Policy” published on its website (accessed Aug. 19, 2008): ): “Perhaps the most important factor in determining whether a defendant will receive the death penalty is the quality of the representation he or she is provided. Almost all defendants in capital cases cannot afford their own attorneys. In many cases, the appointed attorneys are overworked, underpaid, or lacking the trial experience required for death penalty cases. There have even been instances in which lawyers appointed to a death case were so inexperienced that they were completely unprepared for the sentencing phase of the trial. Other appointed attorneys have slept through parts of the trial, or arrived at the court under the influence of alcohol.”(procon.org.) The death penalty shows discrimination. The more money people have in their
...Available By: Acker, James. Contemporary Justice Review, Sep2008, Vol. 11 Issue 3, p287-289, 3p; DOI: 10.1080/10282580802295625
In Franz Kafka’s The Trial, Josef K. is guilty; his crime is that he does not accept his own humanity. This crime is not obvious throughout the novel, but rather becomes gradually and implicitly apparent to the reader. Again and again, despite his own doubts and various shortcomings, K. denies his guilt, which is, in essence, to deny his very humanity. It is for this crime that the Law seeks him, for if he would only accept the guilt inherent in being human (and, by so doing, his humanity itself), both he and the Law could move on.