Why the innocent…?
"Trial by Fire" is an article by David Grann, which is about Todd Willingham who was convicted of setting a fire and killing his young children.This case received a lot of attention as there was evidence that he was innocent. Grann showed that through his article where he started by presenting the evidence of arson investigators in a persuasive way that when you are throughout the first section you are likely to be convinced that Willingham was guilty. However, throughout the rest of the article by the appearance of Gilbert who is a writer who agreed to help Willingham with his case and Hurst who is an experienced scientist who based investigation on scientific basis and the difference between their approaches and interoperations toward information from arson investigators may result in changing our way of thinking about the case. What led to Willingham's conviction and execution was a pattern of flawed thinking associated with the absence of scientific thinking.
First of all, we see what scientific thinking looks like with Hurst. He played a unique role by proving that arson investigators findings were invalid which are that the fire was as a result of an accelerant and that Willingham was guilty and he was the one who commit it, Vasqez and Fogg the fire investigators were so convinced and relying on the wrong idea that it was arson without even testing it which is considered as junk science and had no basis of reality. Hurst observed the case from a science perspective. That was supported by what K.C.Cole who is a science writer mentioned that scientific knowledge and thinking in a scientific way improves the ability of seeing. Also, He looked at each piece and tested and researched it and the original invest...
... middle of paper ...
...ade a difference in Willingham case. That what Hurst showed that he was able to falsify arson findings and prove that it wasn't arson. However, there are many other factors. For example, such cases showed be viewed from different perspectives and questions should be raised about each evidence. Lack of complexity and the expectations that are contaminated with beliefs might have led to the biases and unproven assumptions. Also, Gilbert's thoroughness showed weaknesses in the original investigation and the police by showing the importance of asking questions and skepticism and not just believe what experts are telling you. However, the original investigators and police findings were affected by expectations and beliefs that it was arson; even Willingham's lawyer didn't do much to slow things down. That suggests the power of the shared idea that Willingham was guilty.
Kassin, Saul, and Lawrence Wrightsman (Eds.). The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Chapter 3. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985. Print.
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...
Since its debute, Kimberlianne Podlas discusses how “CSI has been attributed with causing a rash of unjustified acquittals, exerting on trials what is called the CSI Effect.” This refers to how CSI influences or impacts a jury’s interpretation of a case. She goes on to say that, “Even though forensic evidence is prevalent on CSI, it is a factor in only a small portion of real-life cases.” Additionally, “many of the techniques shown on CSI do not exist, and this has led “forensic scientists to complain of the near infallibility of forensic science after watching a few episodes of CSI.” The CSI Effect has caused these viewers of the program, who have gone onto become jurors, to expect the presentation of forensic evidence in order to prove their cases, and without it, they are unlikely to reach a guilty verdict. This has led prosecutors to expect the need to present forensic evidence as a prerequisite to conviction. Even with eyewitnesses and other findings to offset this lack of forensic evidence, many unjustified acquittals have resulted from this mindset as jurors do not believe a case can be proven beyond reasonable
Yet with the help of one aged yet wise and optimistic man he speaks his opinion, one that starts to not change however open the minds of the other eleven men on the jury. By doing this the man puts out a visual picture by verbally expressing the facts discussed during the trial, he uses props from the room and other items the he himself brought with him during the course of the trial. Once expressed the gentleman essentially demonstrate that perhaps this young man on trial May or may not be guilty. Which goes to show the lack of research, and misused information that was used in the benefit of the prosecution. For example when a certain factor was brought upon the trail; that being timing, whether or not it took the neighbor 15 seconds to run from his chair all the way to the door. By proving this right or wrong this man Juror #4 put on a demonstration, but first he made sure his notes were correct with the other 11 jurors. After it was
In 1992, Cameron Todd Willingham was convicted of arson murder, where a fire that was presumably started by him, killed his three children, and in 2004 he was put to death. Later, the Texas Forensic Science Commission, established in 2005, found that none of the evidence used while prosecuting Mr. Willingham was valid, and that the fire was in fact, accidental. Unfortunately, many cases like this have occurred in our nation’s history, where human error was to blame for convicting an innocent person. The American Justice system will only be as accurate as the science and technology that we have in place to remove human error during the process. The movie The Wrong Man is a perfect example of human error in the justice system convicting an innocent
Subsequently, one of the main components of the procedural limitation is innocent until proven guilty, which brings about the right to a Grand Jury- a panel that determines whether or not there is a need to go to trial. As a result, a guilty verdict in criminal cases is determined with evidence that is sufficient and that must be proved “‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” (pg.131), so there is an immense need to increase the chances for the respect of “reasonable doubt” (pg.
“Beyond a Reasonable Doubt” clearly demonstrated the role of a prosecutor in the courtroom. Albeit in a negative manner, Hunter effectively bridged the functions of the police to the criminal justice process during the trial of Metcalfe (Neubauer & Fradella, 2014, p. 150). The murder trial of Metcalfe provided a frightening view of prosecutorial misconduct and unethical behavior of a prosecutor. Hunter betrayed the public he served by conspiring with Lieutenant Merchant to fabricate DNA evidence to ensure victory in the courtroom.
He adds that Willingham writes poetry and draws. By including this it adds more humanistic characteristic to a man who had otherwise been stripped of his mortality and soul by those who have deemed him a sociopath. This allows readers to sympathize with him and makes readers contemplate how can a man that writes and draws possibly kill his own flesh and blood. He continues with his case when he adds the bit where Willingham found out that his appeal was denied. Grann includes that they did not even give an explanation because they deliberated in secret and they didn’t even have to review Willingham’s materials. It gives the reader a sense of anguish for Willingham regarding the fact that the board has no set of specific criteria to judge him on. This was the last leg Willingham was on and it seemed like his life wasn 't taken seriously by the board. It reveals how flawed this system is. Grann mentions that Willingham even tried to study law in order to effectively defend his case. This gives the reader a sense that Willingham is trying to prove his innocence to the best of his ability rather than giving
With the emergence of DNA evidence, cases ae not as highly dependent on eyewitness accounts. So even now there will be fewer wrongful convictions. Juries, judges, prosecutors and police must adjust the weight that they put in eyewitness accounts. An eyewitness account should be a piece of the pie, not the entire pie.
Sub Point A: In the innocence project website Cameron Todd Willingham was wrongly convicted for allegedly setting fire that killed his three d...
In order to understand how to compile evidence for criminal cases, we must understand the most effective types of evidence. This topic is interesting because there are ample amounts of cases where defendants have gotten off because of the lack of forensic evidence. If we believe forensic evidence is so important and it affects our decisions, then maybe we need to be educated on the reality of forensic evidence. If we can be educated, then we may have a more successful justice system. If we have a more successful justice system than the public could gain more confidence that justice will be served. In order to do this, we must find what type of evidence is most effective, this can be done by examining different types of evidence.
Forensic evidence can provide just outcomes in criminal matters. However, it is not yet an exact science as it can be flawed. It can be misrepresented through the reliability of the evidence, through nonstandard guidelines, and through public perception. Forensic science can be dangerously faulty without focus on the ‘science’ aspect. It can at times be just matching patterns based on an individual’s interpretations. This can lead to a miscarriage of justice and forever alter a person’s life due to a perceived “grey area” (Merritt C, 2010) resulting in a loss of confidence in the reliability of forensic evidence.
“A Wall of Fire Rising”, short story written by Edwidge Danticat, presents one man’s desire for the freedom and also, the gap between reality and fantasy which is created by the desire. Two different perspectives of evaluating the life bring the conflict between the Guy and Lili who are parents to the little guy. Throughout the story, the Guy implies that he wants to do something that people will remind of him, but Lili who is opposing to the Guy, tries to settle the Guy down and keep up with the normal life that they are belong to. The Guy is aggressive, adventurous and reckless while Lili is realistic and responsible. The wall of fire is the metaphorical expression of the boundary where divides two different types of people. One is for the people who accept their position and try to do the best out of it, and the other for the people who are not satisfied with the circumstances and desires to turn the table. Through this essay, I am going to reveal how the contradiction in an unwise idealist’s attitude and his speech, and also how it drove the whole family into a horrible tragedy as well.
Lisa Cupido, Fogarty. “A timeline of the Ramsey case.” USA Today n.d.: MAS Ultra- School Edition. Web. 20 Feb. 2014.
...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.