Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald's Fight for Innocence 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. Convicted for the murders of his wife and two kids, thirty-four years ago, Dr. MacDonald still endures the agony of being accused of killing his family. Even after twenty-four years of imprisonment and several unlawful court hearings, additional documentation continues to up hold Dr. MacDonald’s testimony. It happened on a rainy night on February 17, 1970 at the base of Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Military police were responding to a call from Green Beret surgeon Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald, which they thought was a routine call. When the military police arrived they discovered the slaughtered bodies of MacDonald’s wife, Colette, who was twenty six, and his two daughters Kimberley, five, and Kristen, two. A MP who preformed mouth-to-mouth resuscitation revived Dr. MacDonald. He told the police he and his wife stayed up drinking some orange liquor. She went to bed and he stayed up to finish watching the Johnny Carson show. MacDonald fell asleep on the sofa. He was awakened by screams of his wife and daughters. MacDonald claimed that three men standing over the sofa started to attack him with a bladed weapon and a baseball bat. He identified the person holding the bat as a black man with an army jacket with E-6 stripes and two white men, one carrying the bladed weapon. Before he was knocked unconscious he said that there was a lady in the back with a large floppy hat, holding a candle and was saying “acid is groovy” and “kill the pigs.” When MacDonald woke back up he found his wife lying on the ground, and tried to revive her with mouth-to-mouth resuscitation with no success. He then found his daughters and tried to help them. This is when he called for an ambulance. The Army CID sent a new, inexperienced investigator named William Ivory to investigate the scene. Ivory decided after looking around the house that MacDonald made up the story of the killers. He also persuaded everyone that he was the culprit. This meant that everyone in Ivory’s chain... ... middle of paper ... ...t his the evidence in front of a jury. Still believing in his innocence Jeff is filing for parole after fourteen years of eligibility. He is hoping to meet parole board criteria so he can be released on parole. This is a good case to show how it isn’t always the poor, black, or Hispanic groups getting tried for something they haven’t done. It shows that a white doctor could get his life destroyed by an unfair Judge and prosecutors. Works Cited Briscoe, Daren, MacDonald Wants Out. Newsweek, January 24, 2005. Vol. 145, Issue 4, p8, 1/4p, 1c. Retrieved from EBSCO database on the World Wide Web: http://web3.epnet.com/ Briscoe, Daren, The Green Beret Murders Haven’t Given Up. Newsweek, August 30, 2004. Vol. 144, Issue 9, p6, 4/5p, 1c. Retrieved from EBSCO database on the World Wide Web: http://web3.epnet.com/ Http://www.themacdonaldcase.org/case_overview.html Http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/family/jmacdonald/2.html?sect=12 The Associated Press, DNA Tests for Jeffrey MacDonald/ Former Physician Seeks Evidence in 1970 ‘Fatal Vision’ Slayings. Newsday. March 24, 1999. Retrieved from eLibrary on the World Wide Web: http://elibrary.bigchalk.com/libweb/
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.
For over a decade, a man recognized as the axeman murdered numerous people, and was never apprehended. The murder of Joseph and Catherine Maggio sniped the attention of many. All of the suspects have unfortunately been released because there has not been sufficient evidence to prove their guilt. However, the investigation led to affirm points to one suspect, a frightening guy named Joseph Mumfre.
In July of 2008, one of the biggest crime cases devastated the United States nation-wide. The death of Caylee Anthony, a two year old baby, became the most popular topic in a brief amount of time. Caylee’s mother, Casey Anthony, became the main suspect after the child supposedly was kidnapped and went missing. To this day, the Casey Anthony case shocks me because justice, in my opinion, wasn’t served. I feel as if the criminal conviction system became somewhat corrupted in this case. The entire nation, including the court system, knew that Casey Anthony was behind this criminal act, but yet she escaped all charges. I chose this case not only because it’s debatable, but also to help state the obvious, this case was handled the wrong way. Clearly the legal system was biased, which worked in Casey Anthony’s favor, freeing a murderer.
Whitley, Kyles was tried for murder, convicted and sentenced to death. However, upon review of his case, it was discovered that the prosecution had failed to give evidence about a witness, a man named “Beanie”, and several other pieces of material evidence. Since these were not given to the defense and the evidence was significant, he was given a new trial (United states v., 1976). What separates this case from the others is the fact that the evidence suppressed was witness testimony and the witness’ background and prior statements. The testimony of “Beanie” in this case was important, as it had “significant inconsistencies and affirmatively self-incriminating assertions (Kyles v. whitley, 1995)”. Because this information and prior testimony relevant to the case weren’t released, the conviction was overturned. This is relevant to the dilemma because one of the areas that had importance to the defense was that the witness wasn’t consistent in their testimony and that led to issues with their effectiveness as a witness. Referring back to the dilemma and the officer’s conduct, the officer wasn’t consistent in their testimony, namely that they denied wrongdoing and later confessed. This shows that the officer is an inconsistent witness and that if this is discovered, and the prosecution must disclose that information, he can be impeached as a witness. This will mean that he is not as effective in the criminal justice
Another powerful opinion yearning to be exposed, is the one held by Henry Drummond, the defense’s attorney. The lawyer undoubtedly came to d...
Wrongful conviction is an issue that has plagued the Canadian Justice System since it came to be. It is an issue that is hard to sort out between horrific crimes and society’s desire to find truth and justice. Incidences of wrongful conviction hit close to home right here in Saskatchewan as well as across the entire nation. Experts claim “each miscarriage of justice, however, deals a blow to society’s confidence in the legal justice system” (Schmalleger, Volk, 2014, 131). Professionals in the criminal justice field such as police, forensic analyst, and prosecutors must all be held accountable for their implications in wrongful convictions. There are several reasons for wrongful convictions such as racial bias, false confessions, jailhouse informants, eyewitness error, erroneous forensic science, inappropriate, professional and institutional misconduct and scientific limitations that society possessed prior to the technological revolution (Roberts, Grossman, 2012, 253 – 259). The introduction of more advanced DNA analysis has been able to clear names and prevent these incidences from occurring as often. As well as the formation of foundations such as The Association of Defense for the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC). Unfortunately, mistakes made in the Canadian Justice System have serious life altering repercussions for everyone that is involved. Both systematic and personal issues arise that require deeper and more intense analysis.
Garcia, M. (2007, Nov 28). Lawsuit filed in wrongful conviction; DNA cleared man in prison 10 years. Chicago Tribune Retrieved from http://ezproxy.uhd.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/420674321?accountid=7109
Tim O’Brien book really shines light on how little everyone knows about the Green Berets. The Green Berets are the elite, they hold a very mysterious origin, and the folklore is outrageous. The propaganda about the Berets that was told to the American public was all a public relation stunt to gain support for the Vietnam War. Now many decades later we can grasp who the Green Berets are, but it’s astonishing that we still know very little about them.
Anatomy of Injustice is the story of the homicide indictment of Edward Elmore. The author, Raymond Bonner, displays a convincing argument that the state of South Carolina indicted a guiltless individual when Elmore was sentenced for
On New Years Eve 1984 Christine Jessop a nine-year-old girl from Ontario, Canada was found murdered in a field about fifty kilometres from where she lived. Christine Jessop’s body had been left in disgusting position, she had also been sexually assaulted and decapitated. The police felt they needed to arrest this killer before another similar crime could be committed. After extensive investigation by the police of at least three hundred and fifty suspects, a young musician and next door neighbour of the Jessop’s, Guy Paul Morin was arrested and spent eleven months in jail waiting for the case to be brought to trial. Whilst incarcerated, an undercover officer was placed in Morin’s cell to try and extract information from him relating to the crime. This was done because the police were aware of the weakness of their case. In all the time Morin was under observation, by the undercover officer, he at no point admitted any involvement in the murder of Christine Jessop. In 1986 the case went to trial, mid-way through, in an astonishing tactic Morin’s lawyer tried to prove that he was schizophrenic. The jury didn’t believe the evidence of the schizophrenia, but never the less Morin was still acquitted of the crime.
You can imagine my surprise then when his voice rises to a crescendo, a peak of flamboyant outrage and, standing right in front of me, he spins and stretches out a finger and declares the murder to be none other than...Great Uncle Philip? Really? That decrepit old codger in the wheelchair? Can he be
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.
An old proverb states “laughter is the best medicine”. After Randall McMurphy arrives into the hospital, most of the men start to laugh for the first time in many years. The more time McMurphey spends there, the men that are starting to laugh multiplies. They find the littlest things to put a smile on their face, but no one can take this away from them.
Dr. Elizabeth Loftus paints a vividly dark side of the law. While not every case is nearly as false as some that she has described, even she has spoken for the guilty, the system will not be justified until sufficient evidence is truthfully found for every case. Memory is not strong enough to stand on its own. What makes her job worth it is the one person that gets to go home free due to the jury’s consideration of her
Innocent until proven guilty is a daily motto in our governing societies that can either deliver freedom or harsh punishment. While reading and watching doubt it seemed as though the thought of innocence never crossed sister A’s mind. The evidence that has been presented to sister A includes, meetings with Father Flynn, alcohol on his breath and many others. However in my opinion I see Father Flynn as righteous and just man and that is what I’m going to argue in this paper.