Taking a life is a very serious crime and it is seen as one of the worst violent crimes one can commit. Society has a hard time coping with why people result to such cruel violence when usually it isn’t necessary. Taking a life typically results in your own life being taken by the criminal justice system. Many offenders, however, do escape without punishment. First-degree murder is usually defined as a killing that was deliberate and premeditated which is what Michael Dunn is being charged with for shooting a 17 year old Jordan Davis (First Degree Murder Law & Legal Definition). Within my paper, I will summarize the article of the shooting of Jordan Davis, explain the relevance of the article to my Criminal Justice class, and discuss the implications for the criminal justice system. Summarizing Susan Cooper Eastman’s article, Michael Dunn, a 47 white male shot 17 year old Jordan Davis, a black teen, over a dispute over Davis’ loud music. Jordan Davis was with three other teenagers when they parked in a Jacksonville parking lot next to Dunn. Dunn claims he shot Davis because he panicked when the dispute escalated and he saw what looked like a barrel of a gun through the back window as Davis began to get out of his car. Police say that the teen’s car was unarmed. Assistant State Attorney Erin Wolfson believes that Dunn overreacted because of the way that Davis was speaking to him and not listening to his orders to turn his rap music down. Wolfson quoted a witness who heard Dunn state “You are not going to talk to me that way” as the dispute began to get heated. Defense attorneys believe that Dunn acted in self-defense and that it is reasonable that he used deadly force. Medical evidence shows that Davis died inside his vehicl... ... middle of paper ... ... innocent or guilty will affect him tremendously. As of now, the system has done a good job because they haven’t taken sides with Dunn by stereotyping Davis and believing that he had a weapon on him and planning to attack Dunn. The criminal justice system must carefully decide their verdict so that a guilty man doesn’t go free or an innocent man is found guilty and punished. Whether Dunn spends the rest of his life in prison or in society, he will have to live with the fact that he took a teen’s life. Cases regarding self-defense and stand your ground laws can be tricky when deciding the verdict because the criminal justice system is required to stay just and fair. Throughout my essay, I have summarized the article on the shooting of Jordan Davis, the relevance it has to my criminal justice class, and discussed the implications for the criminal justice system.
The case involved a neighborhood watchman, who happened to be on duty when he saw a young black man wearing a sweater jacket called a “hoodie”, walking through the neighborhood. George Zimmerman, the watchman, who was twenty-eight years old at the time, called authorities about a suspicious character walking around in his neighborhood. The authorities told him not to do anything; just continue with his rounds and not worry. Zimmerman, however, decided he would take matters into his own hands. He confronted the young man; they got into a brawl and Zimmerman pulled out a gun and shot and killed Martin. That premise will play a role in this paper as an argument as to why George Zimmerman should have been convicted of committing a crime. Even if the jury could not have reasons to convict him of the second degree murder of Trayvon Martin; they had other choices.
Throughout history there has been considerable tension between race and crimes committed. The court trial of Bernhard Goetz initiated debate on race and crime in the major cities, and the limitations of self-defense. Bernhard Goetz in 1984 shot five bullets in a New York City subway, seriously wounding four young black men. After turning himself into the police nine days later, the public now knew who was the shooter. Bernhard Goetz was entitled the “Subway Vigilante”. The subway shooting incident ideally exemplified the exasperation with the high crime rates of the 1980s. Due to the time period that this incident occurred, Bernhard Goetz was commended and reviled in the media surrounding the case, and the public’s standpoint. The subway shooting, and the court trial following the shooting, lead to the uprise of the fight against crime in major cities. Justice is difficult to define, and in controversial acquittal of Bernhard Goetz, justice in this sense, was not served.
On September 24, 2016, “Charlotte Shooting; police release video and photo evidence,” an article developed by Nick Valencia, a writer for CNN, describes the events leading to the death of Keith Scott. According to the Charlotte Police department, officers were going to an apartment complex for an unrelated incident when officers notice Keith Scott in his car with a firearm visibly in his hand. Officers instructed Keith to drop the firearm. Instead of letting go of the firearm, Keith decided to exit the vehicle when he was told not to. This lead to officers firing upon 43 year old Keith Scott, as they felt he was a danger to everyone who was in the surrounding area.
On September 12th, Carmela Buhbut, a battered wife who shot her husband to death 31 times from a close range, was sentenced to seven years imprisonment. She then appealed to the Supreme Court against the severity of the sentence. No less than three different justices held the complicated appeal- Bach, Kedmi and Dorner. All three of them, agreed that there is no doubt, that taking a person’s life is a crime which Buhbut should be punished for. However, only of them, justice Kedmi, thought the appeal should be dismiss in limine.
Bowers, W, Pierce, G., and McDevitt, J.(1984), Legal Homicide: Death as Punishment in America, 1964-1982, 333
The defendant within the United States v. Jared Lee Lougher case was charged in federal court with the attempted assignation and attempted murder of federal employees, which came as a result of his shooting spree at the Safeway Supermarket, located in Tucson, Arizona. The shooting occurred on January 8th of 2011 and resulted in the deaths of six individuals and the injury of 13 individuals; the alleged target of the attack was said to be “[Representative] Gabrielle Giffords,” whom was among the injured (Audi, 2011). In addition, among the injured was “Federal Judge John Roll and Giffords aide Gabriel Zimmerman” (Audi, 2011). Furthermore, due to Judge John Roll being a federal judge, Loughner...
There are over sixty offenses in the United States of America that can be punishable by receiving the death penalty (What is..., 1). However, many individuals believe that the death penalty is an inadequate source of punishment for any crime no matter how severe it is. The fact remains, however, that the death penalty is one of the most ideal forms of punishment. There are other individuals who agree with the idea that capital punishment is the best form of punishment. In fact, some of these individuals believe that this should be the only form of punishment.
As of late, self-defense has been a very controversial topic thanks to the trial and acquittal of George Zimmerman in the murder of Trayvon Martin. This case gave American’s the cause to question Stand Your Ground Laws, the President of the United States Barak Obama even showed his concern for our nation. Many people felt that Zimmerman was acquitted due to a racial bias, but in accordance with Stand Your Ground laws and other self-defense statutes it is clear that this is not a racial issue. George Zimmerman is a 33-year-oldHispanic man running a neighborhood watch in his affluent gated community in Sanford, Florida. On the evening of February 26, 2012 Trayvon Martin, a 17-year-old
When it comes to punishing criminals, people have a variety of ideas-especially when murder becomes a part of the discussion. Although there are plenty of options proposed, from torture to life in prison, one of the most debated methods is the death penalty. The death penalty, defined simply, is the practice of allowing the imposition of death as a punishment for those convicted of certain crimes, usually murder. While thirty-one states allow capital punishment, an argument that has been raging since the early 1970s is still going on. There are many aspects of the argument, but the two main groups involved in the argument are those in favor of the death penalty, and those opposed. Supporters of capital punishment typically believe that society
For example, in Jacksonville, Florida, Jordan Davis, another unarmed teenager was killed by Michael Dunn. Davis and other teenagers were riding in a SUV with music blasting from the vehicle, when Dunn pulled up alongside of them and asked them to turn the music down . Words was exchanging between the two parties, and Dunn fired 8 to 9 shots into the SUV where he fatally shot Davis. Dunn was arrested and charged with first degree murder. Dunn claimed he fired in self-defense and invoked the “Stand Your Ground law” as his defense. ...
Murder, a common occurrence in American society, is thought of as a horrible, reprehensible atrocity. Why then, is it thought of differently when the state government arranges and executes a human being, the very definition of premeditated murder? Capital punishment has been reviewed and studied for many years, exposing several inequities and weaknesses, showing the need for the death penalty to be abolished.
This essay will discuss the various views regarding the death penalty and its current status in the United States. It can be said that almost all of us are familiar with the saying “An eye for an eye” and for most people that is how the death penalty is viewed. In most people’s eyes, if a person is convicted without a doubt of murdering someone, it is believed that he/she should pay for that crime with their own life. However, there are some people who believe that enforcing the death penalty makes society look just as guilty as the convicted. Still, the death penalty diminishes the possibility of a convicted murderer to achieve the freedom needed to commit a crime again; it can also be seen as a violation of the convicted person’s rights going against the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
It is unnerving to think that everyday some of the most unspeakable murders and killings take place just under the noses of the authorities and normal people. The killers responsible for these crimes are threats to society and deserve capital punishment. The death penalty is an acceptable and fair method of punishment because it serves justice, provides victim’s families with closure, and increases safety.
In the United States, the use of the death penalty continues to be a controversial issue. Every election year, politicians, wishing to appeal to the moral sentiments of voters, routinely compete with each other as to who will be toughest in extending the death penalty to those persons who have been convicted of first-degree murder. Both proponents and opponents of capital punishment present compelling arguments to support their claims. Often their arguments are made on different interpretations of what is moral in a just society. In this essay, I intend to present major arguments of those who support the death penalty and those who are opposed to state sanctioned executions application . However, I do intend to fairly and accurately represent both sides of the argument. Proponents of capital punishment persuasively argue that a “central principle of a just society is that every person has an equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” (Cauthen, p 1). Within this principle, the deliberate (premeditated) murder of an individual is viewed as a heinous act, which prevents the person from realizing his or her right to pursue happiness. They strongly feel that persons convicted of first-degree murder must, themselves, pay the ultimate price. They claim that the death penalty must be imposed in order to maintain the moral standards of the community. Proponents of capital punishment are people who oppose the death penalty are fearful that innocent people may be wrongfully executed. They insist, however, that numerous “safeguards” are built into the criminal justice system which insures the protection of those facing capital punishment. Among the safeguards are: 1. Capital punishment may be imposed only for a crime for which the death penalty is prescribe by law at the time of its commission. 2. Persons below eighteen years of age, pregnant women, new mothers or persons who have become insane shall not be sentenced to death. 3. Capital punishment may be imposed only when guilt is determined by clear and convincing evidence leaving no room for an alternative explanation of the facts. 4. Capital punishment may be carried out only after a final judgment rendered by a competent court allowing all possible safeguards to the defendant, including adequate legal assistance. 5. Anyone sentenced to death shall receive the right to appeal to a court of higher j...
The family of Michael Brown wanted justice for their son in which they felt was an unjust shooting. His mother was quoted expressing mistrust towards the police, "You 're not God. You don 't decide when you 're going to take somebody from here.” (McLaughlin, E. C. (2014, August 15) The family was obviously hurt by the shooting and wanted justice and support. The community began protesting the shooting and Officer Darren Wilson. Chaos broke out in Ferguson and a State of Emergency was issued. The community felt that the shooting was unjust and did not trust police officers. The community response to the shooting often attracted attention and made many political statements. Darren Wilson’s family were interested in maintaining his innocence. They hoped that the investigation would prove to the world that Wilson acted out of self-defense and did not violate Brown’s rights. The Criminal Justice system’s interests all hoped to create reforms and eliminate racism in police departments. On the local level many had to maintain safety in the community and assure proper police procedures. The state had to step into issue curfews and State of Emergencies to keep the state safe despite protests and riots as well as make sure Darren Wilson did not violate any laws of the state of Missouri. The state also hoped to create reforms to better race relations. On the federal level was the investigation which hoped to find out if the