Steve Harmon is guilty of felony murder because he participated and had knowledge about a crime that ended up in the death of an innocent citizen. The judge stated the if you believe that Steve harmon took part in the crime than you must return a verdict of guilty. I believe that Steve went into the drugstore on that day for the purpose of being a lookout. Some of Steve’s journal entry’s lead to him feeling guilty or like a “monster”.
b) Juror Five reevaluated the proper direction for that knife to be utilized. He stated that “‘[y]ou don’t use this kind of knife that way. You have to hold it like this to release the blade. In order to stab downward, you would have to change your grip.’” Juror Eight then reassured that “‘ the boy is pretty handy with a knife.’” As a result, Juror Five expressed that the boy “‘would go for him underhanded.’” (Rose 61-62). Comprehending that a switchblade knife is correctly used with an underhand and that the defendant upholds experience with knives, the person who murdered the father had to be inexperienced to utilize such an awkward angle for stabbing.
I personally favor the verdict to acquit Leroy Reed because I believe that even though he broke the law, he should not be charged with the crime of possessing a gun. The most convincing evidence was the expert witness who stated that Reed had a 2nd grade level of intelligence. When Leroy Reed was testifying, he was asked if he was a convicted, and he answered no. He was then prompted to answer yes to seeing a parole officer. Reed was then asked again if he was a convicted felon and he said yes. Reed gave conflicting answers on being a convicted felon during his testimony, which shows his mental capabilities. EXPAND. Another piece of convincing evidence was after Reed showed the sheriff the sales receipt of the gun as a form of identification, Reed voluntarily turned the gun in. Reed knew he had the gun, but he willing turned it in. I believe Reed should not be convicted for willing turning in his gun when requested by the sheriff. The last piece of convincing evidence was that Reed was not carrying the gun on him. Reed was looking to become a private investigator, which led him to p...
Johnny and Dally have both had hard lives. Both of their parents were abusive and uncaring. At Johnny’s
My next claim is in regards to the “old man” juror. If it were not for him voting not guilty the second time, the boy would have been found guilty. He said the reason he voted that way was because of that one juror standing up to the other 11 jurors. He felt that everyone needed to hear all of the arguments because they were dealing with a man’s life. Thanks to that man, the boy was saved.
As the three witnesses claim what happened, it proves that all evidence points to James King who is guilty of Alguinaldo Nesbit’s murder. The testimony of Bobo Evans shows how James King was the one that pulled the gun from Mr.Nesbit’s hands and pulled the trigger. Lorelle Henry’s testify shows that she was a witness of James arguing with him at the counter before the gun was pulled out. The testimony of Osvaldo Cruz proves that James had one of the men planning the whole robbery from the starts and every one who was a part of it knew that he was going to be there in the store. Evidence shows that James King did not try to hide the trail of known fact of him being there at the robbery because of the number of people that had known that he
Throughout the trial, defense attorneys attempted to argue Salvi was suffering from psychological disorders that would make him incompetent for trial. Ultimately, however Salvi was found competent to stand trial. After reading Salvi’s full psychiatric interview, the official court transcript of the four-day competency hearing, and the day-to-day summary; I have come to agree that the defendant, John Salvi was competent to stand trial.
Although not discussed in the textbook, one thing that raises major concerns is the fact that Florida courts were charging Chavis separately for the same crime that they were charging the King brothers with. This calls into question the amount of evidence the prosecution possessed and casts reasonable doubt on both cases. Age is also an issue; at 14 Derek King would barely be presumed old enough to have the mental capacity to commit a crime, and at 13 Alex King would be assumed incapable unless proven otherwise. It is important to note that these were their ages at the time of the trial and that Derek King was 13 and Alex King was 12 when they committed the crime. If the Florida courts allowed it, Alex King may be able to claim diminished responsibility due to his claims that he “loves” Chavis, the 40-year-old man who is said to be “sexually obsessed” with
One reason I think he is guilty is that his response was not in proportion to the threat. According to the court documents of People v Goetz, it states that 1 or 2 youths asked for 5 dollars and then Goetz shot them. The teens did not show any weapons and he still shot them. Also, only 1 or 2 of the teens approached Mr. goetz. He shot all four of them. The teens did not even threaten him. He just shot them on the spot.