In the novel Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer by John Grisham, the reader is introduced to Theodore Boone, a kid in body but a lawyer at heart. Theo does not play sports, nor does he have a very active social life, instead he tutors underprivileged children and provides (to the best of his own knowledge) advise to others who do not have anybody else to turn to. The novel Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer centres around a high-profile murder case between the Strattenburg Districts Attorney’s Office who is representing Mara Duffy versus her husband Pete Duffy. In the eyes of the prosecution, Mr. Duffy sought to claim the one million dollar life insurance plan his wife had, therefore he h a robbery gone bad. In the book Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer, the author John Grisham uses an in-depth usage of conflict, use of diction within the texts and the detailed use of static and dynamic characters to entice the reader. The novel Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer has a very in-depth conflict that is showcased all throughout the novel. In Theo's community, there is a high-profile murder trial about to begin. Mr. Pete Duffy, a wealthy business man, is accused of murdering his wife Myra Duffy. The prosecutors have the idea that Mr. Duffy did it for the one million dollar insurance policy he took out on his wife earlier, however they have no proof to support this accusation (Grisham 53). The defendants do however have the proof that no one saw the murder, for all everyone knew, Mr. Duffy was playing his daily round of golf at the golf course right by his house. As the trial moved on, the jury was starting to lean towards letting Mr. Duffy walk a free man. To this point, there has been no proof to support the prosecutors statements that Mr. Duffy killed h... ... middle of paper ... ...r as if they were in the courtroom of a murder trial. In some ways, the use of advanced diction could cause problems for the reader to comprehend it, however the author has worked in small descriptions of what some of the more advanced judiciary terms are. Finally, the author uses a very advanced characterization of virtually all the characters mentioned within the story, from the mature and well-respected Theodore Boone to the every-so opinionated office secretary Elsa. Without a doubt, Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer entices the reader into the mystery that is will Mr. Duffy be proved innocent or guilty? John Grisham does a great job into hooking the reader into wanting more of this eye-opening crime and drama novel. Works Cited Grisham, John. Theodore Boone: Kid Lawyer. First ed. Vol. 1. New York, New York: Penguin Young Readers Group, 2010. Print. The Boone Ser.
...his seemingly routine case of fornication and premarital pregnancy proved to be significant for early American legal history. The unfolding of this story and the legal changes that it brought about makes evident that by the end of the seventeenth century, The Eastern Shore had shaped a distinct legal culture. The characters involved in each case also revealed the extent the powerful players were able to shape the law to their own self-interests. The goal of the powers to be was to protect property interests, protect personal reputation and liberty, and to maintain social order.
On the evening of Ms. Heggar¡¦s death she was alone in her house. Eddie Ray Branch, her grandson, testified that he visited his grandmother on the day that she was killed. He was there till at least 6:30 p.m. Lester Busby, her grandnephew, and David Hicks arrived while her grandson was still there and they saw him leave. They then went in to visit with Ms. Heggar. While they were there, Lester repaid Ms. Heggar 80 dollars, which he owed her. They left around 7:15 p.m. and went next door to a neighboring friend¡¦s house. David Hick¡¦s went home alone from there to get something but returned within ten minutes of leaving. Because he was only gone for 5-10 minutes, prosecution theorized TWO attacks on Ms. Heggar because he could not have killed his grandmother during this 5-10 minute period alone. At 7:30 p.m., 15 minutes after the two had left, an insurance salesman called to see Ms. Heggar. He knocked for about 2 or 3 minutes and got no reply. Her door was open but the screen door was closed. Her TV was on. He claimed to have left after about 5 minutes and then he returned the next morning. The circumstances were exactly the same. With concern, he went to the neighbor¡¦s house and called the police. His reasoning for being there was because the grandmother¡¦s family had taken out burial insurance three days before she had died.
He was a mysterious unknown figure in the shadows; a slithering serpent in the courtroom. The defense attorney for the Scopes Monkey Trial was a cunning man. Clarence Darrow had difficulty defending his client, John T. Scopes, against his opponent, William Jennings Bryan. To everyone’s surprise however, he proved that he could prevail, even if he was under pressure from the world around him. Though Scopes was found guilty under Darrow, he surprisingly only had to pay a fine of one hundred dollars. With such a minor sentence, Darrow is said to be the person who actually won the trial. In the play Inherit the Wind by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee, the character, Henry Drummond, parallels his real-life counterpart, Clarence Darrow, through intelligence, bitterness, and determination.
In the Forensic case #356228, the skeletal remains found in January 2009 in a deer hunting area were those of a black male greater than the age of 45. The jury felt based upon the evidence provided that the skeletal remains found were that of Robert Rutherford and the accused, John O’Hara was guilty as charged. The incidence was speculated to have happened around four years ago, when the defendant and the victim were in a quarrel over the hunting area. Due to the fact that John O’Hara went to confession more in February 2009, indicated that he had a guilty conscience. John O’Hara was known for hunting in the area and based on the evidence provided the jury speculated that he shot Robert Rutherford possibly from his deer stand, resulting in his death.
“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,
Today in Maycomb County, there was a trail against a local African American man named “Tom Robinson.” He was accused for raping and beating up a white girl named “Mayella.” His lawyer is “Atticus Finch” is facing off against “Mr. Gilmer” the district attorney. Judge Taylor, appears to be sleeping through out the trial, yet pays attention and tends to chew his cigar. The supposed crime occurred in Mayella’s home, when Tom Robinson went to fix something and then he raped her.
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
Whitley, Kyles was tried for murder, convicted and sentenced to death. However, upon review of his case, it was discovered that the prosecution had failed to give evidence about a witness, a man named “Beanie”, and several other pieces of material evidence. Since these were not given to the defense and the evidence was significant, he was given a new trial (United states v., 1976). What separates this case from the others is the fact that the evidence suppressed was witness testimony and the witness’ background and prior statements. The testimony of “Beanie” in this case was important, as it had “significant inconsistencies and affirmatively self-incriminating assertions (Kyles v. whitley, 1995)”. Because this information and prior testimony relevant to the case weren’t released, the conviction was overturned. This is relevant to the dilemma because one of the areas that had importance to the defense was that the witness wasn’t consistent in their testimony and that led to issues with their effectiveness as a witness. Referring back to the dilemma and the officer’s conduct, the officer wasn’t consistent in their testimony, namely that they denied wrongdoing and later confessed. This shows that the officer is an inconsistent witness and that if this is discovered, and the prosecution must disclose that information, he can be impeached as a witness. This will mean that he is not as effective in the criminal justice
Aaron Burr is born in New Jersey to a well respected family. His father was a graduate of Yale and was the second president of the College of New Jersey. By the age of two, Burr’s grandfather, grandmother, father, and mother have all died from disease and he falls under the care of his uncle, Timothy Edwards. The book depicts Burr having a strong personality, continuously challenging his uncle. This behavior appears later and influences decisions made in life. Discontent, Burr decides that he needs to leave his Uncle’s control and in order to accomp...
Louis, Kemper had confessed of killing her son and setting the house on fire after police officer had told her that she had failed the polygraph test. The judge in this case had let the information and the results of the polygraph come in to court as part of the evidence of the State. Later in the trial, the judge decided to call the case a mistrial as the jurors had heard and gathered too much information of the case that could sway their judgment. The case was also questioned in the matters of a suspect confessing to a crime after falsely having been accused of failing the polygraph test when in fact she had passed the polygraph. The defendant’s lawyer had stipulated to the Supreme Court that the confession had been corrupted by the detective involved in this case. Later on in 2006 the case had been blocked by the Supreme Court (Matthew, F.,
Johnny’s experience as an attorney falls far short of being the legal crusader that he envisioned for himself. Rather, it is quite short-lived . His legal career ends abruptly when his unpreparedness for an easy trial against a wealthy white woman causes him to lose the case for his client. Upon his hu...
How could she, his wife, betray him and kill him with no remorse? The article, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors’ Demands for Visual Evidence,” written by Sylvia Hsieh, stresses the importance of visual evidence. Hsieh writes in a formal tone as she delves into a pool of various example trials used to explain visual evidence, along with specific quotes obtained from well-known lawyers and workers in the industry. This simply states the recurring idea that visual evidence is important.
Abadinsky, Howard. Law and Justice: An Introduction to the American Legal System. 6th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.
The Supreme Court used this evidence, and the fact that the pants and the blood had been transported to the crime lab in the same box, and that a vial and a quarter of autopsy blood were missing, to rule that, if known by the jury, could have created reasonable doubt (House V. Bell, 2006). This, along with the evidence, presented by House, that Mr. Muncey had a history of spousal abuse against Mrs. Muncey, and the fact that he had fabricated an alibi to cover his whereabouts for the time of the murder, could have created a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury, had it been presented at trial (House v. Bell, 2006). It was with these facts in mind that the Supreme Court reached a final ruling in this case. The Court’s final ruling was that while House had not presented sufficient evidence to exonerate himself completely, he did present enough evidence to create the question of his actual guilt, and warranted a new trial (House v. Bell, 2006).
The title of this book is Final Argument, which reflects on the story its self. The book is about a lawyer named Ted Jaffe that is living a life of success, but due to recent events he is pulled back to a case that occurred twelve years ago. If he doesn’t act fast, a potentially innocent man (Darryl Morgan) is going to be executed. Ted must make a Final Argument on the bases that Darryl is innocent and didn’t receive a fair trial due to bribery and corruption.