More handpicked essays just for you.
Debate on racial imbalance within the justice system
Racial Discrimination in the Criminal Justice System
Justice system race discrimination
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Debate on racial imbalance within the justice system
According to, “Murder on a Sunday Morning”, Brenton Butler was accused of a murder of Mary Ann Stephens. During the trial, there has been some moral and corrupt evidence to prove whether this “suspect” was guilty or not. Many logical pieces of evidence were provided during the trial such as, photographs of the clothing that was worn by Mr. Butler to observe whether Mr. Stephens could identify it – and proving that Mr. Butler was accused because of his race. There has been biased argumentation during this trial such as identifying racial profiling (African-American), another eye-witness name Mr. Stevens discovered a bag of Mary Ann Stephens near the garbage, been accused by the police for “taking the gun” out of bag – but failed to fingerprint
I recently read a book called Monster by Walter Dean Myers, in which a sixteen year-old boy named Steve Harmon was arrested for being accused of shooting a drugstore owner, and watched a documentary titled Murder on a Sunday Morning about a fifteen year-old Brenton Butler being charged with murdering a woman at a motel. I found that the book and the documentary had many similarities and differences. I thought this because both cases are about a young African-American boy who is in custody for something that they did not do. Both police investigations didn't go thoroughly and just rushed through to arrest the boys immediately and are centered around a white defense attorney who tries to convince the jury that the male teen did not committed the crime by giving out evidence.
Summary of the Case On August 1987, Donald Butler opened a store in Winnipeg, Manitoba, called the “Avenue Boutique”. In this store, Butler sold and rented pornographic publications that were considered “hard core” and sexual paraphernalia. A couple weeks later, the City of Winnipeg Police searched and seized Butler’s sexually explicit materials lawfully. From this, Butler was charged with 173 counts under s. 163 of the Criminal Code. These charges included s. 163(1)(a) which criminalizes the distribution and the possession for distribution of obscene materials, as wells s. 163(2)(a) for selling and exposing obscene material to the public.
In 2000, Delwin Foxworth was beaten and set on fire outside of his North Chicago home. Foxworth survived the attack but died two years later in a nursing home. Marvin Williford was arrested and convicted for the murder in 2004 and was given an 80 year life sentence in prison. Williford’s defense attorney David Owens is requesting a retrial for the case because of the absence of Williford’s DNA profile in the DNA samples that were taken from the crime scene. Additionally Owens makes the argument that the eye witness testimony of a woman who was present during the attack was unreliable. The woman states that she clearly saw Williford and two other assailants commit the crime, but Owens and Geoffrey Loftus, a professor of psychology at the University
On May 7th 2000, fifteen year old Brenton Butler was accused of the murder of Mary Ann Stephens, who had been fatally shot in the head while walking down a breezeway of a hotel with her husband. Two and a half hours later, Butler is seen walking a mile away from where the incident occurred, and is picked up by the police because he fit the description of the individual who shot Mary Ann Stephens. However, the only characteristic of the description that Butler featured was the color of his skin. Police then brought Butler to the scene of the crime in order for Mary Ann Stephens’s husband, James Stephens, to confirm whether or not Butler was the individual who had shot his wife. Almost immediately, Stephens identifies Butler as his wife’s killer.
Throughout the trial, there were multiple points in which Bibbins had false accusations thrown against him from the victim and the law enforcement of Baton Rouge. The victim clearly misidentifies her rapist and clearly is distraught while identifying, "The victim's initial description of the attacker was a man with long and curly hair, wearing jeans. Bibbins was wearing grey shorts and had short, cropped hair at the time" (Innocent Project). As with false accusations there were multiple occasions in which evidence proving Bibbins innocence were not present during the trial. Baton Rouge police had discarded evidence from the crime, "The allegations of evidence tampering gained credibility in 2003 when DNA testing unavailable at the time of Bibbins' trial excluded him as the girl's rapist" (Sherrer). Eventually Bibbins is able to use this information of evidence tampering to help strengthen his case against the city of Baton
This is when I had known that the criminal justice system had mad various errors with this case. For instance the only evidence that the police had, had at the time was a description of the suspect, from the victim’s husband whose adrenaline level was very high. In my opinion when a traumatic thing just occurred I think it would of been best to of asked the eye witness what the suspect had looked like multiple times and giving a good length time period between when I asked. As well as when they arrested Brenton, the first mistake I noticed was how they claimed they found/captured the murderer of Mary Ann Stevens right away. The second mistake I noticed was how they asked the victim’s husband if Brenton Butler was the one who had pulled the trigger killing his wife. Now usually from what I’ve seen when police want someone to be identified the police do a couple things: 1. Capture Multiple people and 2. Have them stand in a police station while the witness picks out who he/she suspects was the suspect. Now the police did not do that, they captured one suspect and had him sit in the back of a cop car while the eye witness, which in this case was Mary Ann’s husband, judge from a distance to see if that was the boy who killed his wife. Additionally when they made that arrest my immediate question was why did the forensic team in which ever unit test Brenton Butler hands and clothes for gun
In the weeks following the discovery of Christine's body, the police revealed several strong suspects but no direct evidence linking anybody. Shortly thereafter they began to focus on Morin, solely because of his "strange behaviour" (Chisholm, 1995). Police became even more suspicious when Morin failed to attend the funeral - he thought he had to be invited (Chisholm, 1995). This series of circumstantial evidence became further plagued with errors and tainted testimony as his trials wore on. Right from the start there exist a prejudice towards Morin. Police convinced the Jessop's to perjure themselves so that evidence would stick. When brought in for questioning, the interrogation was audio taped for corroboration. The tape ran out after forty-five minutes and Fitzpatrick and Shephard testified that in the remaining ninety minutes Morin confessed to the killing and repeatedly made guilty comments (King, 1998).
The evidence discovered during the investigation suggested to the police that OJ Simpson may have had something to do with this murder and they obtained an arrest warrant. The investigators believed that they “knew” OJ Simpson committed the murders. His lawyers and him were informed of the arrest warrant and agreed to a specified time when OJ would turn himself into authorities. Investigators are later admonished, by the defense, on how they handled the crime scene.
It is never enough to create a great product; it has to be coupled with a desire for that product. The competitive advantage that Wedgwood brought to his company was the ability to create demand for goods. He was able to see the needs of the market before the market did and then cultivating market demand to satisfy those needs with his goods. A differentiation strategy was put into place by Wedgwood for his products as there were already a number of pottery options available on the market. Instead of the low quality, irregular options that were available on the market, Wedgwood’s pottery was made from clay, rather than wood, and was a more uniform finished product. A method of increasing demand by raising the perceived value of the pottery is to drive up demand by the high affluent. One of the ways that he accomplished this was through a technique called inertia selling. By putting a high quality and reputable product in the hands of the elite with no penalty, Wedgwood can display first-hand his high-end craftsmanship and design. With the working class working in the homes of...
The majority of published literature in the US derived from the Vietnam War primarily has a base focus on effects the war experience had on Americans, and on the American culture and psyche. However, Robert Olen Butler, author of the Pulitzer Prize winning, "A Good Scent From a Strange Mountain," as well as many other critically acclaimed publications has been recognized for "breaking the mold" of traditional war writers by constructing his narratives in the first person voices of the Vietnamese. In order for an American write to compose stories through the perspective of individuals from a culture considered so foreign from our own he would have to have accumulated a significant amount of experience and knowledge for his works to be considered legitimate. Butler himself is well versed in the Vietnamese language, has voluntarily participated in the Vietnam War as a translator, and has taught in a predominately Vietnamese American area. The question at hand is; do these facts alone allow his stories to be admissible as authentic works?
This scandalous case centers on a woman named Katherine Watkins. On Friday, August 18, 1681, Katherine accused a slave by the name of John Long, also known as Jack, of rape. There was some evidence of violence, but there were also outstanding questions about her character and conduct. Those who testified, however, painted a different picture about certain events preceding the crime. They were John Aust, William Harding, Mary Winter, Lambert Tye, Humphrey Smith, Jack White (Negro), Dirk (Negro), and Mingo (Negro). Whether these individuals were so inclined because Katherine Watkins was a Quaker, rather than an Anglican, we can never really know. That certainly fueled the fire, though. The day in question involved an afternoon of cider drinking. Several of the witnesses in the testimonies recounted Mrs. Watkins sexual advances to multiple of Thomas Cocke 's slaves, particularly, a mulatto named Jack. John Aust pleaded that Katherine, at one point, had lifted the shirt of one slave and announced “Dirke thou wilt have a good long thing” (Sex and Relations, 53). She allegedly had thrown another on the bed, kissed him, and, “put her hand into his codpiece” (Sex and Relations, 53). The most interesting piece of evidence that Aust brings forward is that Jack was actually avoiding Watkins at the party, an apparent attempt at avoiding any intimate entanglement with her (Sex and Relations, 52). Finally, he reported that Watkins and Jack had gone into a side room (Sex and Relations, 53). Later in the trial, Humphrey Smith seemingly referred to Aust 's testimony. His deposition suggested that he and Aust had some reservations about Jack 's guilt (Sex and Relations 54). Clearly, the character of the plaintiff was considered important evidence in the trial of a slave for rape. The reasonable extenuating circumstances of the case might have granted the magistrates leave way
Crimes in America can be vicious and brutal, often leading to long, draw out trials, but it is only fair if you charge the right man. The only way that it can be fair is if you go by the facts and not the appearance of the accused. Many trials in America have men of color pointed out to be criminals. Many crimes are committed for a reason but many people label it as unknown. People are racist especially against colored people, they believe that white men are innocent but that is not always true. They always turn against the colored people for many crimes that could have been committed by a white man. The novel,Monster and the documentary “Murder On A Sunday Morning” are the same because,both cases have similar charges,both crimes were taken in a public place,and the both consist of racism either by the jury or police.
It was a mistaken identity case where the distressed raped women picked out the wrong black man. Even though the conviction was overturned due to DNA evidence, a mistaken eyewitness testimony led to a wrongful conviction that the Burlington Police upheld without question due to prejudice feelings toward determine Ronald Cotton (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo 283). Ronald had his whole family testify that he had been home the night Jennifer was raped however because he had mixed up his dates when he originally confessed that police assumed he was lying despite what he and his family said. The other indication of racism on the police force was when the second rape victim did not pick Ronald Cotton out of the physical lineup; she claimed she was terrified of the black men standing in front of her and just needed to leave, even though she knew it saw Ronald that had raped her (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo 129). Ronald was believed to be guilty and was trying to prove his innocence from the beginning. This simply cannot occur in a justice system where one is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty; racism played a part in convicting this innocent man. Even during the second court case when he was trying to prove his innocence he remembered feeling the jury turn and look at him, "every single one of their white faces" believed how terrible of a man he was (Thompson-Cannino, Cotton and Torneo
In 1976 Randall Dale Adam’s car breaks down and he is offered a ride by another teenager, David Harris, who, unbeknownst to Adams, was driving a stolen vehicle. When they are stopped by a police officer, multiple shots are fired, killing the officer. When this case was sent to court the jury strongly believes Adam is guilty of the murder. However, Errol Morris exposes misleading witnesses’ testimonies and police misbehavior that led to the jury conviction of the wrong man.
On Bloodsworth’s appeal he argued several points. First he argued that there was not sufficient evidence to tie Bloodsworth to the crime. The courts ruled that the ruling stand on the grounds that the witness evidence was enough for reasonable doubt that the c...