The Bloody Sunday
On 30th January 1972, 13 Catholics were killed when soldiers of a
British paratroop regiment opened fire during a civil rights march in
Londonderry. The day became known as Bloody Sunday. Its impact led to
a resurgence of violent opposition to the British presence in Northern
Ireland. Although the details of what took place that day remain
controversial, many of the basic facts are not disputed, 14 people had
been killed etc.
The demonstration was held in protest at the policy of internment
without trial. It was organised by the Northern Ireland Civil Rights
Association. About 10,000 people gathered in the Creggan Estate
planning to walk to Guildhall Square in the centre of the city, where
a rally would be held. The march itself was illegal because the
Stormont Parliament had banned all such protests.
There have been two investigations into what actually happened. The
first in 1972 by Lord Widgery and one taking place at this moment by
Lord Saville. The inquiry by Lord Widgery reported that the
paratroopers’ firing had "bordered on the reckless". It also concluded
the soldiers had been fired upon first and some of the victims had
handled weapons.
Both sides used his report to support their views. Widgery, at that
moment in time, according to Lord Saville didn’t have sufficient
evidence to point the finger of blame clearly to one side. The
evidence which was extracted could’ve have been contaminated from
‘foreign’ substances. For example, gun powder was found on the
victim’s hands, this could have been from genuinely handling gun
powder. Or on the other hand when the bodies were loaded into the
truck...
... middle of paper ...
... not
thorough and was simply skimming the surface. Also taking into
consideration the 35 years for another inquiry to be launched in which
justice is properly done. This meant that eye witnesses aren’t as
reliable simply as the lengthy time span since Bloody Sunday, this
including both marchers and the paratroopers themselves. The new
enquiry is helping people to understand what had actually happened on
30th January 1972 and in doing so getting a view from both sides and
scientists who investigated into what had happened and why they
changed their mind. If all this is in the clear then people would be
in the know-how of who is the guilty party and in doing so which
people had done injustice, were brought to justice. This would also
mean people would stop using violence as way of avenging what had
happened in 1972.
However, police should have acknowledged that individuals can make mistakenly identify the wrong person, especially an individual who had just tragically witnessed his wife’s death, and that the positive identification can not be the only evidence used to confirm the identity of a suspect. In addition, a search was never conducted on Butler’s home to see if any evidence was there. Unless my memory fails me, police officers also did not perform a gun residue test on Butler to see if he had recently fired a gun. Regardless, police did not find any physical evidence, such as blood, on Butler’s clothes or body. In fact, there was no forensic investigation of evidence conducted at all. Mary Ann Stephen’s purse was later discovered in a trash can, but it wasn’t until after the acquittal of Brenton Butler that a fingerprint belonging to the real killer was found on her purse. Overall, the ethical issues involved in the Brenton Butler case are astounding. The best solution to resolve those issues is to thoroughly perform job duties with integrity. Investigators had to know that more evidence than just a positive identification made by one, rightly upset individual was not substantial enough to confirm the identity of the
Even though the prosecution presented evidence to the court, the only clear-cut hard fact the prosecution had against Anthony was that she failed to file a report for her missing daughter Caylee and that when she finally did a month after her daughter had gone missing, she proceeded to lie profusely to the authorities on the events that took place. The prosecution focused highly on the forensic evidence of decay located in the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car. The use of a cadaver dog to search the vehicle led investigators to be able to determine that a decomposing body had been stored in the trunk of the car. The forensics department used an air sampling procedure on the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car, also indicating that human decomposition and traces of chloroform were in-fact present. Multiple witnesses described what they considered to be an overwhelming odor that came from inside the trunk as it where the prosecution believes Caylee’s decomposing body was stowed. Several items of evidence were ruled out to be the source of the odor, as experts were able to rule out the garbage bag and two chlorine containers located in the trunk as the source. The prosecution alleged that Casey Anthony used chloroform to subdue her daughter and then used duct-tape to seal the nose and mouth of Caylee shut, inevitably causing her to suffocate. Based off the
On March 5, 1770 a fight broke out in the streets of Boston, Massachusetts between a patriot mob and British soldiers. Citizens attacked a squad of soldiers by throwing snowballs, stones and sticks. British Army soldiers in turn killed five civilians and injured six others. The presence of British troops had been stationed in Boston, the capital of Province of Massachusetts Bay since 17681. The British existence was increasingly unwelcome. The British troops were sent to Boston in order to protect and support the crown-appointed colonial officials attempting to enforce unpopular Parliamentary legislation.
People from around the country came by any means necessary to support the march. One man from Chicago began rol...
The officers tampered with evidence and made a false discovery that he was the person and that is how he was convicted (Innocent Project N.D.). Many forensic methods have been implemented in research when looking for evidence, but the methods that are not scientific and have little or nothing to do with science. The result of false evidence by other means leads to false testimony by a forensic analyst. Another issue with forensic errors is that it is a challenge to find a defense expert (Giannelli, 2011).
On Thanksgiving evening, November 27, 1992, Sergeant Kenneth Mathison and his wife Yvonne drive their 1988 tan Ford van along Route 131 in Hilo, Hawaii. The rain is pouring down and before he knows it, Kenneth Mathison is awaiting police assistance as he cradles his wife’s dead body in the back of their van. Mathison, a sergeant of 25 years with the Hilo Police Department was allegedly informing his wife, a maternity nursing professional at the Hilo Medical Center, that he was being investigated in his second paternity suit. According to Mathison, when Yvonne heard the news, she jumped from the passenger side of the van. While he was looking for her in the blinding rain, Mathison purportedly ran over his wife. He then carried the body into the van and secured it with yellow rope in the back before attempting to find help. Will the forensic evidence support Mathison’s account of that fateful evening?
...ows what the outcome would have been and how many more lives would have been taken on this tragic day.
Spanning from 1095 to 1212 C.E, the Crusades were an effort made by medieval Christians to regain their holy lands back from the Muslims. There were five crusades in total going in order from the First Crusade to the Children's Crusade. A few were effective in their own respects although these Crusades proved costly to the European Kingdoms as a result of large losses of life. This paper will explore these crusades and explain why some succeeded whereas others failed.
“The Crusades: series of wars by Western European Christians to recapture the Holy Land from the Muslims.” (Encarta “Crusades”) The Crusades first began in 1096 and ended in the late 13th century. The term Crusade originally meant that the European’s would use all their efforts to regain the power from the Muslims. They wanted to retake the city of Jerusalem, which was holy to Christians because that’s where the crucifixion of Jesus Christ occurred. Europeans later used it to allocate any military efforts against non-Christians. The Crusaders also created feudal states in the Near East. The Crusades played an important role of European expansion and colonialism. “They mark the first time Western Christendom undertook a military initiative far from home, the first time significant numbers left to carry their culture and religion abroad.”
The Crusades occured because the Christians wanted to regain their Holy Land, in doing so many knights risked their lives. During the Middle Ages a series of events lead up to the Crusades that were fought between the 11th and 13th century. The Crusades began when the Byzantine emperor, Alexius I Komnenos, asked Pope Urban II for help because the Seljuk Turks were gaining more power and land. As a result, the pope sent Christian knights to help regain the Holy Land. After some time the Christian knights captured Jerusalem from the Muslims, gaining back the land for them. Although some people may think that the knights fought in the Crusades in order to gain wealth, but in the long run it was because they wanted to protect Christian territory. Christian knights were greatly driven by their religious beliefs to fight in the Crusades.
ways, such as not having DNA evidence, not enough information about the crime, and lastly
Throughout history, events are sparked by something, which causes emotions to rise and tensions to come to a breaking point. The Boston Massacre was no exception; America was feeling the pressure of the British and was ready to break away from the rule. However, this separation between these two parties would not come without bloodshed on both sides. The British did not feel the American had the right to separate them from under British rule, but the Americans were tired of their taxes and rules being placed upon them and wanted to succeed from their political tyrants. The Boston Massacre would be the vocal point in what would be recognized, as the Revolutionary War in American history and the first place lives would be lost for the cost of liberty. Even though the lives were lost that day, eight British soldiers were mendaciously accused of murder when it was clearly self-defense. People who are placed in a situation where their lives are threatened have the right to defend themselves. History does not have the right to accuse any one event those history may have considered the enemy guilty when they are fighting for their lives.
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...
Steverud, Jonas, and Brian Russell. "U2MoL." U2MoL - War - Sunday Bloody Sunday. Mourji, 22 Feb. 1998. Web. 01 Mar. 2017.
penance" (Campbell p.14). A pilgrimage to the Holy Land was not an easy task to