More handpicked essays just for you.
Children mental health problems from domestic violence assaults
Easy on battered woman syndrome
Psychological effects on domestic violence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Introduction to case:
The victim, John Kondejewski, a sergeant in the military as well as battle school instructor, was killed on May 15th, 1997 in Brandon Manitoba by the defendant, his wife, Kimberley Kondejewski, in the bedroom of their home (Sheehy 88). The couple was married for over 17 years before the proceeding occurred. Kimberly shot her husband three times that Thursday night; first shot to the chest, second and third shot were closer range, which led the police to charge her with first-degree murder (Sheehy 115). However, she also tried to end her life, fortunately she was only wounded. She even had composed a suicide note addressed to their children, Jennifer and Christopher. The judge assigned to the case was Justice Rodney H
…show more content…
Garry Rainnie stated, “it was about the killing of a human being” (Sheehy 115). Clearly, Rainnie did not deny John was a cruel father, husband and person, however, he still believed Kim should be found guilty of the murder she committed. Rainnie claimed that she killed John out of Jealousy as he was going to leave her for his girlfriend, Karla Sweeting (Sheehy 89). John had asked Karla to marry him four days before his murder occurred. Rainnie used the testimonies of Jennifer and Christopher to ask the harrying question, “why did she not leave,” (Sheehy 93, 101). He also used Jennifer to show the jury that Kim was allowed out of the house. Rainnie stated that as “Kim was not isolated and imprisoned in her home, she was not a “real” battered women. ‘(Sheehy 95) However, his theory was disproven as Dr. Walker, the originator of the ‘Battered Women Syndrome theory” never stated that women must be ‘isolated and …show more content…
Wolson never denied that Kim shot her husband, however, he did not agree with the first-degree murder conviction. He believed Kim acted in self-defense to protect her children as well as her life as she felt they were in danger. John was very abusive towards Kim, he had even sent her too Winnipeg one weekend and he told her “to do it” which meant kill herself by getting into a car accident so that he could receive her life insurance. Wolson also examined both Jennifer and Christopher on the stand and concluded that their fathers abuse was constant. Jennifer told the jury that, „he had grabbed her arm..slapper her face…called her a bitch (Sheehy 92).“ She also stated that her father beat Chris „even worse (sheehy 93) than her. She stated, „He had been hit so hard by his father that he had marks on his body…had been removed by child family services for six weeks.(sheehy 93).“ Wolson argued that these statements clearly demonstrated why Kim shot John, clearly for self-defense purposes. He stated; “ what she did, she did it to defend her children She didn’t care about herself. She did it to protect her children.” (Sheehy113) As you can see, Kim clearly is a selfless mother who did absolutely everything in her power to protect her children and provide them the best life
The evidence presented to myself and the other juror’s proves that Tyrone Washburn is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the murder of his wife, Elena Washburn. On March 12, 1979 Elena Washburn was strangled in the living room of her family’s home. Her body was then dragged to the garage, leaving a trail of blood from the living room to the place it was found. Her husband, Tyrone Washburn, found her in the family’s garage on March 13, 1979 at 1:45 A.M. When officer Dale Chambers arrived at the scene he found her lying face down in a pool of blood. The solid evidence in this case proves only one person, Tyrone Washburn, is guilty of murder.
Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your attention today. [Slide #2] I would like to assert that separation is not the end of a relationship. Divorce is not the end of a relationship. Even an arrest is not the end of a relationship. Only death is the end of a relationship. In the case of defendant Donna Osborn, her insistence that ‘“one way or another I’ll be free,”’ as told in the testimony of her friend Jack Mathews and repeated in many others’, indicates that despite the lack of planning, the defendant had the full intent to kill her husband, Clinton Osborn.
At the time of the murder of which David Milgaard was accused of committing he was just 16 years old. He was a hippie, constantly in trouble. Even before he was a teenager he was getting into trouble. His parents and teachers considered him impulsive; he resisted authority (Regina Leader Post, 1992, as cited in Anderson & Anderson 1998). He was removed from kindergarten because he was considered to be a negative influence on the other children. When he was thirteen he spent time in a psychiatric centre (Anderson & Anderson, 1998)
On December 15, 2005, Minnie Smith was found dead in the home she shared with her husband, Marvin Smith. Smith was charged with first-degree murder for the death of his wife. At the end of the trial, the prosecution asked for and received an aiding-and-abetting instruction, which would allow the jury to convict Smith even if they found that he had not delivered the fatal blow. The jury convicted Smith but did not specify which theory of guilt they adopted. The California Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction and rejected Smith’s argument that he had not been given adequate notice of the possibility of the aiding-and-abetting instruction. The California Supreme Court denied Smith’s petition for review.
To conclude, despite all the possibilities and other theories of Mrs. Maloney committing the crime out of anger or severe frustration towards Mr. Maloney, there is no credible way to prove it. Mrs. Maloney simply killed her husband as a result of mental anguish, self defense and trauma inflicted upon her. Mrs. Maloney did not plan to kill her husband. She was simply a victim of her situation and could not control her actions. Mrs. Maloney should not be spending time in jail, but safe at home grieving the loss of her husband.
Roger A. Kooney is a 27 year old African American male that hit and killed 34 year old Chris Pariano. Allowing more prosecuting evidence of a criminal offender, Kooney has had 8 previous police encounters for drinking and driving and 19 other serious vehicular offences. Following his arrest, Roger Kooney was charged with alleged DWI, vehicular homicide, involuntary manslaughter, and reckless endangerment. After the trial, the jury decided on a verdict of guilty. Roger Kooney should remain Detained and in police custody and bail would be set at 1 million dollars. The charges according to citizens and public officials were given accordingly and fair. Roger Kooney was a criminal weather it was accidental or not. There were no public objections
trial of two men for the 1971 murder of Helen Betty Osborne in The Pas Manitoba.
(a) Prosecutors have nearly limitless discretion in the most critical matters they must consider, yet they are held to very high ethical standards.
The truth can sometimes depend on the circumstance and the person who states it. When confronted with conflicting accounts or questionable details, a judge within the court of law must decide the sentence of an individual with these obstacles in place. In this case, the defendant Dannie McGrew has been charged with the murder of Barney Quill, but claims that it was self-defense. The following contains a thorough explanation as to how the judge decided upon the verdict of acquittal.
On January 17, 1982, her body was found in the wardrobe of her bedroom by a neighbour, Jimmy Holloway. He had been given a key to her home by Mrs. Edwards. Mrs. Edwards had been wounded to death. Whether she had been sexually attacked would remain a subject of some difference (Berkeley Law School Death Penalty Clinic, 2012; Bonner, 2013; Grinberg, 2014; Law Book Review: Anatomy of Injustice: A Murder Case Gone Wrong by Raymond Bonner, 2012; Van Horne,
Convicted for the murders of his wife and two kids, thirty-four years ago, Dr. MacDonald still endures the agony of being accused of killing his family. Even after twenty-four years of imprisonment and several unlawful court hearings, additional documentation continues to up hold Dr. MacDonald’s testimony.
On the the 15th of November 2012, Dragi Maglovski was convicted guilty of the murder of his wife, Rosa Maglovska. This conviction was made after a 7-day hearing in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Mrs. Maglovska’s murder was the result of 10 stab wounds and 37 slash wounds, all inflicted by Mr. Maglovski. The wounds were inflicted with a knife taken from the couple’s kitchen.
Although jabbari admitted to stabbing the man who attempted to rape her in the back with a knife she had stated that another man was to blame for his death. She claimed that the judge did not pay attention
The criminal justice system treats all forms of serious crimes in an unforgiving manner. If the offenders commit a crime while under the influence of drugs, they are likely to be put in prison for a longer period of time rather than someone who committed the same kind of crime but was not under the influence of drugs (Taylor, 2008). With that said there are many causes of drug related crimes. Usually when there is a drug related crime it tends to be more serious in terms of damage done than non related ones. It is important to further explore crimes that are drug related in order to see the root causes.
While reading the case about Mr.Hossack 's murder i saw the wife, Mrs.Hossack, as innocent at first. The children all claimed that the two did not argue for over a year, so why would she kill him now verses a year ago? When the youngest child, Ivan Hossack, came to the stand and "told his story in a straight, unhesitating manner" it made it easier for me to believe in Mrs. Hossack 's innocence. The child even said that he saw his mother aiding his father when he called out for help. If she had been the one to swing the axe, why would she help him and risk getting in trouble? Most importantly, if he was conscious and talking, why wouldn 't he say who to murderer was? He could have easily identified his wife in the dark after being married for over twenty years, and yet he didn 't identify who had tried to kill him. Dr. Dean first stated that the axe did not hit the speech portion of the brain, so he could have been conscious and yelling out for his wife. Dean later stated that the fatal blow from the axe would have left Mr.Hossack unconscious. The murder weapon had blood on in and apparent hairs stuck to one side; "Prof. John L. Tilton of Simpson college... was unable to say definitely that the hair had been