The wrongful conviction of Tammy Marquardt was also aided by the misconduct of the parties involved. Goudge (2008) claimed that Smith, other medical experts and prosecutors operated with a “think dirty” mindset, which presumes guilt first, rather than the ‘innocent until proven guilty‘ doctrine highly valued in the justice system. “The Goudge Commission found the actual words ‘think dirty’ in instructions from Ontario’s chief coroners, pathologists and police chiefs in 1995” (Shapiro, 2011). In Ms. Marquardt’s case, there is no way to conceal the fact that the professionals of the adversarial system did not satisfactorily perform their roles. It has already been demonstrated that Dr. Charles Smith “saw his role as supporting the prosecution, …show more content…
Charles Smith attacked easy targets; many of those he helped convict shared parenting similarities. James Lockyer represented Marquardt and several others in which Smith played a part in the conviction. He asserts that being an “easy, easy mark” was the common denominator among those he helped exonerate from Smith’s wrongdoing and “Tammy was a good example of an easy mark [being] a young, single mother who was impoverished and on welfare” (Shapiro, 2011). It becomes very clear that Charles Smith targeted his victims regardless of the evidence found (or fabricated) to support their guilt or innocence. He speculated on issues that were so far from his line of duty as a medical expert, raising legitimate concern of his intention to fulfill his assigned role, or if his desire be a hero for the prosecution and secure convictions of ‘failed parents’. Tammy Marquardt easily fit into this category of poor parent being a “teen mother with a history of substance abuse and troubled relationships with men” (Shapiro, 2011). Her lifestyle and choices were classified as deviant, leaving her stigmatized. Her youth and heavy drug use raised questions about her ability to parent responsibly and were consequently used to convict her. The cold, hard facts of the case meant less to the Crown than the social status of the accused, as is often seen in cases of wrongful
This illustrates the refusal of the rights of victims and the inevitable denial of justice for society. The coronial inquest that was conducted in 2011, corrected some of the initial issues with the investigation. Before the inquest, vital DNA evidence was disposed of, as a result of human error, which meant that the likely suspect could not be identified. As a result of human error the inquest provided some form of justice for society but due to how late it was conducted the family did not receive justice
The applicant Mr. Arthur Hutchinson was born in 1941. In October 1983, he broke into a house, murdered a man, his wife and their adult son. Then he repeatedly raped their 18-year old daughter, having first dragged her past her father’s body. After several weeks, he was arrested by the police and chargedwith the offences. During the trial he refused to accept the offence and pleaded for innocence. He denied accepting the killings and sex with the younger daughter.
Ashley Smith was a young girl that was placed in a juvenile detention centre at age 15 for throwing apples at a mail man. Her short sentence quickly extended into a life sentence because of so many infractions within the prison system. Ashley suffered from extreme mental health issues and was place in a psychiatric prison facility, however this facility was shown in the documentary to be corrupt and their actions with Ashley were extremely illegal. Furthermore, Ashley wasn’t given the proper help and treatment that she needed, instead she was physically and verbally abused by guards in the prison, and she ultimately passed away in the prison. Her death is still being debated about whether
There are many ethical paradigms through which humans find guidance and justification for their own actions. In the case of contractarianism, citizens of a state are entitled to human rights, considered to be unalienable, and legal rights, which are both protected by the state. As Spinello says, “The problem with most rights-based theories is that they do not provide adequate criteria for resolving practical disputes when rights are in conflict” (14). One case that supports Spinello is the case of Marlise Munoz, a brain-dead pregnant thirty-three year old, who was wrongly kept on life support for nearly two months at John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, Texas. Misinterpretation of the Texas Advance Directives Act by John Peter Smith Hospital led to the violation of the contractarian paradigm. Although the hospital was following the directive in order to maintain legal immunity for its hospital staff, the rights of the family were violated along with the medical fundamental principle to “first, do no harm.”
Explain the issue or dilemma using information from the readings in the book and other sources.
Kassin, Saul, and Lawrence Wrightsman (Eds.). The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure. Chapter 3. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985. Print.
Authors Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld founded the innocence project at a law school in New York City, which has assisted in the exoneration of an astonishing number of innocent individuals. As legal aid lawyers, they blithely engaged in conflicts that implicated
Susan Leigh Vaughan Smith was born September 26, 1971 in Union, South Carolina to Linda and Harry Vaughan. She was born the third child in the Vaughan family, with two older brothers. Linda Vaughan divorced Harry when Susan turned 7, and five weeks later Harry committed suicide at 37 (Montaldo). Within weeks of Linda and Harry’s divorce, Linda got remarried to Beverly (Bev) Russell, a local successful businessman. Linda and the children moved from their home into Bev’s, a larger house located in an exclusive subdivision in Union, South Carolina. Susan grew to be a well-liked teenager, and even became president of her Junior Civitan Club and Friendliest Female in her senior year (Montaldo). Everyone liked her, and she put on a great show at school. But after the last bell rang, she had to look forward to seeing Bev at home, something she feared above anything else. Bev had taken to molesting Susan when she turned sixteen, and it was not long afterward that she sought help with the local Department of Social Services (Wiki). The Department of Social services did little to help Susan, only making Bev attend a few counseling sessions (Wiki). When he returned home, he chastised Susan heavily for “airing their dirty laundry in public” and continued with the molestation (Montaldo). I believe thi...
One contradiction in the job of the prosecutor is that they have nearly limitless direction in critical matters; however, prosecutors’ are also held to a very high ethical standard. Prosecutors must screen cases to determine which ones need to be prosecuted; nevertheless, this is the source of controversy with most people. “What makes charging decisions more intriguing and controversial is the fact that in making this decision, the prosecutor has nearly limitless discretion” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This means the prosecutor’s charging decisions are beyond any judicial review, so it must be apparent that a prosecutor
Sue Grafton once stated: “Except for cases that clearly involve a homicidal maniac, the police like to believe murders are committed by those we know and love, and most of the time they're right.” This is clearly the thought the Boulder Colorado police conceived in the case of little beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey. As many have observed from the onslaught of media coverage, the day after Christmas 1996, six year old Jon Benet Ramsey was found buried under a white blanket, bound, beaten, and strangled to death in the wine cellar of their Boulder home. With such a strikingly rare and glamorous story of a six year old beauty queen dead, who was a part of a “perfect American upper-middle class family”, combined with a lack of a lead and ever mounting suspicion piling up against the parents it was no surprise to find that it was fuel to the media and soon stories sold and became a matter of competition between the press. So, like wildfire, this heart-breaking story spread, stretching across the nation, shattering the souls of the world. News broadcasts, magazine and newspaper articles, and television specials all shaped and molded peoples perceptions of this beautiful child’s murder, especially her parents, John and Pasty Ramsey’s involvement or lack there of. The police and FBI’s merciless quest to connect Jon Benet’s murder to her parents, seemed to cause the them to overlook important evidence, or at the very least dismiss suspicious findings that would otherwise send red flags to investigators. There are many contributors as to why this case remains unsolved including lack of investigative expertise, failure to protect valuable evidence, and focusing too much on the parents as suspects but, ultimately, the over involvement of...
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.
During the court case the judge said that lead social worker Gunn Wahlstrom was “naïve beyond belief”. This report brought over 68 recommendations to make sure cases like this did not happen again. The recommendations included putting the child first and the parent’s second. “Jasmines’ fate illustrates all too clearly the disastrous consequences of the misguides attitude of the social workers having treated Morris Beckford and Beverley Lorrington as the clients first and foremost” (London Borough of Brent, 1985,p295). The social workers in Jasmine’s c...
Wrongful convictions in Canada is a very sensitive and disturbing topic that has created concerns as to why individuals are being wrongfully convicted. As people in Canada read about cases involving wrongful conviction, such as Guy Paul Morin, Rubin Carter and David Millguard, it often undermines their faith in the criminal justice system. Tunnel vision, the use of questionable DNA evidence, and eyewitness misidentification are the three main causes of wrongful convictions in Canada. Recognizing and addressing these concerns has led to a reduction in cases of wrongful convictions in Canada.
Walsh, James, and Dan Browning. "Presumed Guilty Until Proved Innocent." Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN). 23 Jul 2000: A1+. SIRS Issues Researcher.
Quinsey, V. (2009). Are we there yet? stasis and progress in forensic psychology. Canadian Psychology, 50(1), 15-15-21.