The Truth About Wrongful Convictions and Capital Punishment
Human beings are not perfect and, therefore, they are capable of making errors. When an individual is being accused of committing a heinous crime such as aggravated murder, both the authorities and the public want to see justice served and the perpetrator punished. However, individuals who are anti-death penalty argue that even with advances in technology, it is easy for a defendant to be wrongly accused of a crime that he or she did not commit. Unless the crime was recorded on a video camera there is no way to know for certain what really occurred.
The court usually places a great deal of weight on the testimony of witnesses, and individuals who are against the death penalty argue that these testimonies are not always accurate or reliable. Anti-death penalty advocates reason that witnesses who are at the scene of a crime are usually terrified at the time that the crime is taking place and they are often not paying attention to the appearance and the features of the perpetrator.
Therefore, they cannot accurately identify the offender. People who are against the death penalty suggest that a jury can be swayed by the statements of a witness and it is possible for a witness to falsify their testimony. Such was the case in Florida with convict Jesse Tafero.
Jesse Tafero, Sonia Jacobs, and Walter Rhodes were all being accused of killing two police officers. Rhodes was offered a less severe sentence if he testified against Tafero and Jacobs. Rhodes claimed that the pair played a significant role in the murder of the policemen and they were both sentenced to be executed. A year later, Rhodes retracted his testimony and declared that he was solely responsible for the crime.
Despite this confession, Tafero was still executed. Individuals who fight against the death penalty frequently cite the Tafero case as one of the instances in which an innocent person has been executed for a crime for which he or she was not responsible.
Since the death penalty was reestablished, over 130 individuals who were convicted of murder have been exonerated from death row as a result of new evidence suggesting their innocence. Anti-death penalty activists cite this as one of the primary reasons that the death penalty should be abolished. Just because 130 innocent individuals have been spared capital punishment, this does not mean that there are not still innocent individuals on death row awaiting execution.
Records indicate that numerous convicts maintained that they were innocent of the crimes that they had been convicted of up until the day they were executed. Chances are that some of these convicts were indeed innocent and they were executed for someone else's crimes. Individuals who are against the death penalty argue that as long as the death penalty remains intact, there is a chance that innocent men and women will be executed for a crime that they did not commit.
Anti-death penalty advocates illustrate that as a result of technological advances and the advent of DNA evidence, many convicts have been released from prison because evidence indicated that they were innocent or that someone else was guilty of the crime of which they were convicted.
Individuals who argue against the death penalty suggest that if this is true of convicts who are serving time in prison, it is likely also true of convicts who are awaiting execution on death row. It is fairly nonsensical to risk killing an innocent individual when incarceration can punish criminals and diminish the threat that they pose to society by keeping them behind bars. If you need legal advice and assistance, contact wrongful death lawyers.
Voluntary Intoxication Overview
A General Guide to Criminal Laws
There are major aspects of a crime that must be satisfied in order for an individual to be convicted of a crime. If one of these aspects is missing, then a crime was not committed. The major aspects of a crime have been established in order to ensure that an individual who is being accused of a crime is actually guilty of the crime in question.
They not only address the illegal actions that have occurred, but also the offender's state of mind at the time that the crime was committed. When all of the major aspects have been satisfied, an individual is responsible for a detrimental crime and they may be punished accordingly. However, if one of the major aspects are not fulfilled, then the defendant cannot be held criminally liable for the harm and damage that has occurred.
Element of the Crime
The United States criminal justice system has been designed in order to help ensure that individuals who are being accused of a crime are only convicted if they have in fact committed a crime. The punishments for violating criminal law are often very severe and oppressive. They often cause the offender to experience a large financial burden or to miss out on many years of life.
A criminal sentence will have very serious consequences on the life and the future of an individual who has been convicted of a crime. Therefore, it is essential to guarantee that an individual who is imposed a sentence for a crime actually deserves the sentence that he or she is receiving. In order to help ensure this, various elements of the crime must be addressed and satisfied. If all of the necessary elements of a crime are not satisfied, then an individual cannot be convicted of committing a crime.
Mens Rea
Mens rea is one extremely important aspect of all criminal cases. For an individual to be found guilty of committing a crime, the State must not only prove that the offender committed the crime, but also that the perpetrator had a guilty mens rea at the time of the crime. The term mens rea refers to an individual's state of mind at the time that he or she takes part in a criminal activity.
In order for an individual to be held liable for his or her actions, the State must be able to prove that the defendant had the intention to act illegally. The State may also prove that the defendant acted dangerously with the knowledge that his or her actions were harmful and that those actions may injure another individual.
In many cases, a defense lawyer will try to argue that his or her client cannot be found guilty because he or she did not have the intent to harm another person or to break the law. If a criminal intent is not present, then an individual cannot be charged with committing a crime.
It is possible for an individual to take part in criminal behavior by accident. There are many examples in which an individually unknowingly or unintentionally takes part in a crime. Another person may be seriously injured by the offender, but if the perpetrator did not have a guilty mens rea, he or she cannot be punished.
Actus Reus
One of the most important aspects of a criminal law case is the actus reus. Without an actus reus there would be no case at all. Unlike the mens rea, the actus reus has nothing to do with an individual's intent or state of mind at the time that he or she committed a crime. The term actus reus refers to the crime itself. It is the criminal activity that takes place and that is being analyzed in a criminal investigation.
Actus reus may include an extremely wide range of activities. During a criminal investigation it is essential that the State collect the evidence that is necessary to convince the jury that the individual in question is the individual who is responsible for committing a crime.
This is often done by collecting all of the objects and the information that may help to support the case. It is also accomplished by finding witnesses and obtaining testimony from them. The testimony of witnesses plays an extremely important role in a criminal investigation.
Once the actus reus has been established and it has been proven that the defendant is responsible for committing the crime in question, it is essential to prove that he or she had the criminal intent to break the law before he or she can be found guilty.
Concurrence
Concurrence is one extremely important element of a crime. If a prosecutor cannot prove that concurrence has occurred, then the defendant cannot be convicted of committing a crime. In order for concurrence to be satisfied an individual must have the intention to violate the law and cause harm at the time that the criminal activity has occurred.
The actus reus and mens rea must occur at the same time in order for an individual to be held liable for the harm that has occurred. Therefore, if an individual is responsible for accidentally causing harm to a hated enemy upon whom he or she had previously wished harm, he or she will not be found guilty of committing a crime. This is because even though he or she may be happy about the injuries that the victim has sustained, he or she did not intend to cause those injuries at the time that the victim received them. Without concurrence there is no crime.
Causation
The relationship between the criminal activity that took place and the effects of that activity is causation. Causation is the actus reus in association with the mens rea. In most cases, the causation is the action that an individual took part in to cause a specific outcome.
For example, an individual may be angry with another person and in an attempt to cause him or her harm the offender may hit the individual with a weapon. The intent and the action of striking the individual was the causation of the severe and extensive injuries that the victim occurred.
In general, the term causation refers to an action or behavior. However, causation may also include the failure to take part in required and necessary actions. In order for an individual to be convicted of a crime, the causation must first be determined and the court must prove that it was the defendant who committed the crime.
Strict Liability
Strict liability is a legal practice that has been the cause of some controversy. In the majority of criminal cases, the State must prove that the defendant was not only guilty of the crime in question, but that the offender had the intention to break the law and to cause injury or damage to another person or another person's property. However, in cases of strict liability these usual laws are not upheld.
In strict liability cases, the State does not need to prove that the defendant had a criminal intent when the injury or the damage occurred. In instances where this applies, the defendant’s intent and state of mind are not taken into consideration. All that the prosecutor must prove is that the damage or injury was caused by someone or something for which the defendant was responsible.
There are many different situations in which strict liability is evoked. The damage that is sustained may range a great deal from minor property damage to death. In most cases of strict liability, the defendant will be required to compensate the victim for the damage or the injury that has occurred.
Personal Offenses
There are various different crimes that may occur against an individual. Personal offenses occur when an individual takes part in criminal activities that result in physical injury or harm to the well-being of another person. This type of criminal behavior varies a great deal in severity. It can range from threats and minor assault to brutal rape.
An individual who is the victim of a personal offense may sustain extensive physical injury as a result of his or her traumatic experiences. It may also result in the victim's death. Personal offenses may cause an individual to suffer from long term psychological effects along with the physical wounds that he or she receives.
In many instances, individuals who are responsible for subjecting another person to physical harm are sentenced to extensive punishments. The penalties will vary a great deal based on the severity of the crime that they committed. Threats and minor assault are punished much more leniently than aggravated assault.
Personal offenses violate the safety and the freedom of another individual. Therefore, the punishment must fit the crime and individuals who continue to pose a threat to other people must be incarcerated.
Property Offenses
While personal offenses are criminal behavior that adversely affect the health and the well-being of another individual, property offenses affect an individual’s property. An individual is responsible for committing a property offense when he or she damages another individual’s property or when he or she takes objects that do not belong to him or her.
There are many different types of property offenses. Like personal offenses, they vary a great deal in severity. A property offense may include minor shoplifting, in which an offender takes a small item from a store. It may also include arson, which is extremely dangerous and may cause severe physical injury to individuals who are around when it occurs.
Individuals who are responsible for property offenses have various different motives for taking part in the criminal behavior that they carry out. In many cases, property offenses are punished less harshly than personal offenses. However, this is not always the case. Property offense are extremely dangerous and often result in death. Therefore, these crimes are taken very seriously and are punished accordingly.
Participatory Offenses
It is extremely common for criminals to be apprehended and put on trial for their crimes. Every year, millions of individuals are sentenced to various penalties for criminal activity that they have taken part in. These individuals are often burglars, rapists, and murderers.
People expect these individuals to be caught and punished for their crimes. But people often give little consideration to the individuals who are responsible for participatory offenses.
Participatory offenses occur when an individual is responsible for assisting with or taking part in some aspect of a criminal endeavor. This individual may not be the primary actor in the venture, but he or she may have in some way contributed to delinquent activity. He or she may have provided the primary actor with financial assistance or advice.
There are various different types of participatory offenses and they are all considered to be very serious crimes. Individuals who are responsible or taking part in participatory offenses may experience extensive legal repercussions for their actions.
Necessity as a Criminal Defense
Using Entrapment as a Criminal Defense
Excessive Government Involvement In Criminal Defense
The Separate Jurisdictions of Federal Law
When the United States Constitution established the Federal Government, the Founding Fathers intended for the Federal Government to maintain a limited amount of power. The purpose of the Federal Government was not to create and enforce criminal laws.
Deterrence At A Glance
What You Should Know About Criminal Law
Criminal law is an essential body of law and a very important legal practice. Without the establishment of criminal law and recognized punishments for violating these laws, it is likely that crime rates would be much higher than they are now.
Throughout the history of human civilization, criminal law has acted to deter individuals from partaking in harmful or dangerous behavior. This has been accomplished through the establishment of harsh and severe punishments that are imposed upon individuals who are responsible for disregarding the law.
Without laws and regulations, citizens would be free to take part in any activity that they desired. They would be more apt to act on impulse and give into negative emotions because they would not receive legal repercussions for their actions. Therefore, chaos would be widespread.
All forms of crime would likely increase a great deal in frequency. Individuals who were not fond of another person may take part in assault or homicide because they would not need to fear capital punishment or incarceration. Drug possession, use, and distribution would be much more widespread than it is today. If an individual wanted something, he or she could take it without purchasing it.
Although the necessity of criminal law is very evident, there are still many concerns about judicial procedures. It is important that the problems and the complications that exist in criminal law be acknowledged and addressed.
Objectives
There are various different reasons why a criminal punishment will be imposed upon an individual who is responsible for violating the law. Each punishment has different goals and aims and various things can be accomplished by handing a criminal sentence to an offender who has caused harm or injury to another person.
In general, the majority of people in the United States believe that a perpetrator should be punished for any crimes that he or she commits. Using this mentality, criminals receive criminal sentences as a form of punishment for their actions.
However, the use of criminal law to impose punishment upon an offender is a controversial topic. Many people believe that it is wrong to punish individuals who have violated the law because the law is supposed to be emotionless and the use of punishment implies that some form of emotion is present in court proceedings. Instead, these individuals believe that the criminal justice system should focus on deterrence and rehabilitation.
Criminal sentences should be imposed in order to improve society, not to exact revenge on an offender. Therefore, when a criminal punishment is decided upon the judge should take into consideration how this punishment will effectively benefit the community. This could be by incarcerating criminals to keep dangerous offenders off of the streets. It may also be by providing criminals with education and counseling services while they are in prison so that they may grow and develop to be productive and positive members of the community.
In some instances, an individual who has caused harm or damage to another person or to another person's property will be required to repay his or her victim or his or her community with money or with time and services.
Criminal sentences such as these help ensure that the criminal justice system is not just seeking to get even with criminals, but that the system is investing time and resources into helping criminals improve and transforming them into law abiding citizens. If this is not a possible outcome, then criminal law should be primarily concerned with keeping the public safe from dangerous individuals.
Major Aspects
Sometimes it is difficult to discern if an action or a behavior should be considered a crime. Not all harmful and detrimental behavior is carried out with malicious intent. Accidents occur that may have devastating and irreversible results. However, if an individual did not intend to harm anyone, then it seems unreasonable for them to be incarcerated with murderers and repeat violent offenders.
Some individuals should not be sentenced to criminal punishments because they do not deserve the harsh realities of imprisonment. In situations such as this, sentencing an individual to incarceration would be considered a form of cruel and unusual punishment. The punishment that he or she receives is very disproportional to his or her behavior.
In order to avoid this, there are many different elements of a crime that must be satisfied before an individual can be convicted of taking part in criminal activity. If these aspects have not been fulfilled by the offender, then the defendant cannot be convicted of a crime because his or her behavior cannot be considered to be criminal. It is the responsibility of the prosecutor to present the court with sufficient evidence to convince the jury that each of these elements is satisfied.
The most essential part of any criminal case is evidence proving that the defendant is responsible for the crime in question. However, this is not the only element of a crime that must be satisfied. Once the prosecutor convinces the jury that the defendant has caused the damage or the injury that has occurred, he or she must also prove that the offender intended to cause this harm.
There are various different types of offenses that an individual may take part in and which may result in legal action against the offender. Illegal behavior may result in injury to another person or damage to another person's property. An offender may also face severe criminal charges if he or she had even the smallest role in criminal behavior. No matter what type of crime has been committed, all of the major aspects of a crime must be satisfied in order for a defendant to be found guilty of a crime.
Actus Reus
In order for a crime to occur an individual must first take part in an activity that has been deemed to be illegal. The illegal activity is known as actus reus. In order for an individual to be convicted of a crime a prosecutor must convince a grand jury that the defendant is responsible for the crime in question. The prosecuting attorney will be required to present evidence to the court that will leave the jury with no doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime.
The evidence that may be presented to the court includes objects that were found at the scene of the crime, documents, video recordings, DNA evidence, and witness testimonies. If this evidence is not successful in convincing the jury of the defendant's guilt, then the jury cannot convict the defendant of a crime. If the jury is going to convict an individual of a crime, then he or she must maintain no doubt that the defendant is at fault.
It is commonly believed that it is easy to determine what constitutes a legitimate actus reus. However, there is often confusion and debate regarding who is responsible for taking part in a crime. This is especially true in cases of omission. In instances of omission, the court must decide whether or not failure to partake in specific actions constitutes a crime.
It is possible for actus reus to occur as a result of the failure of an individual to behave in a certain matter. If it is known that the individual is responsible for the actus reus, then the criminal defense attorney may attempt to discredit the actus reus by trying to prove that the actus reus was not voluntary. If the offensive behavior was not voluntary then actus reus did not occur and the offender cannot be charge with a crime.
Separate Jurisdictions
One of the most important parts of a criminal investigation is discovering where a crime took place. The crime scene will provide investigators with important and invaluable clues and information. If investigators locate a crime scene they may be able to determine how a murder victim was killed, as well as gather essential evidence to support their case. Locating a crime scene is also the most reliable way to determine who has jurisdiction over a specific case.
Before a criminal investigation can really begin jurisdiction must be established. The law enforcement agency that is granted jurisdiction over a specific case will be given the right and the responsibility of collecting evidence, locating and apprehending the criminal, and presenting the evidence to a jury who will determine the fate of the criminal.
There is a range of different types of jurisdictions and various ways in which jurisdiction may be determined. Jurisdiction is often the subject of intense debate between different State governments, as well as between the Federal and the State Government. It is not uncommon for the lines between jurisdictions to become blurred and for arguments to ensue. The Government that does receive jurisdiction over a specific case will be responsible for presiding over that case.
Capital Punishment
Capital punishment is in no way a new or a unique idea. Since the beginning of history individuals have been subjected to the death penalty for various different actions and crimes. In the early history of the death penalty, torture was used as a method of entertainment for rulers and government officials.
They developed barbaric methods of torment used to inflict intense pain and suffering upon their victims. The reasons that individuals would suffer the death penalty could vary a great deal, from high treason to the sudden whim of a dictator.
Today, many countries around the world continue to utilize the death penalty as a method of deterrence and punishment. In the United States, capital punishment is reserved for the most atrocious criminals who have been convicted of murder. n other countries around the world, the way in which the death penalty is imposed and the methods of execution would be considered to be cruel and unusual punishment by the standards of the United States. Stories regarding executions emerging from third world and underdeveloped countries are often horrific and heinous. This is not to say the practice of capital punishment in the United States is perfect or not flawed.
There are many problems and complications that continue to exist with the death penalty in the United States. Statistics regarding capital punishment illustrate a very troubling reality. Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomical discrimination are all very evident when reviewing data and information related to the imposition of the death penalty. Data indicates that wrongful convictions are possible and they occur much too frequently.
In instances such as this, an innocent individual may be executed for a crime that he or she did not commit. It is troubling enough that an individual may spend many years in prison for someone else's crimes, but once an individual is executed there is no way to correct the mistake that has been made.
Because of these problems many political, religious, and social groups voiced concern about the use of the death penalty. As a result, numerous states have outlawed capital punishment, and the states that continue to maintain the death penalty have altered various laws regarding capital punishment.
Life Imprisonment
In recent years, public support for the death penalty has decreased a great deal. Individuals, communities, and organizations have begun to acknowledge all of the problems that exist with capital punishment. In order to address these problems, many states have banned capital punishment in favor of a life imprisonment sentence. In states where the death penalty continues to be maintained, the frequency of criminal execution has decreased a noticeable amount.
The use of life imprisonment as an alternative to capital punishment negates the possibility of irreversible and unforgivable mistakes. However, there are many individuals who feel that life imprisonment is not successful in keeping society safe from dangerous criminals. People who support the death penalty often raise valid concerns about the sentence of life in prison.
Life imprisonment sentences are not just handed to individuals who have been convicted of murder. There are many different types of crimes that may warrant a life imprisonment sentence.
If a convicted criminal is sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, then the offender will be required to spend the rest of his or her life behind bars. However, this is not always the case.
Generally, the term life in prison is very deceiving and misleading. This is not the only factor that has caused a great deal of debate surrounding life imprisonment. There are occasions when this sentence is imposed upon juveniles who are under the age of sixteen. Many people feel that the use of this punishment on minors is unconstitutional.
While life imprisonment sentences have been the subject of copious amounts of argument, judicial officials do take important steps in order to ensure that dangerous criminals who pose a continuous threat to the community remain in jail.
Individuals who oppose the death penalty often cite the possibility of wrongful convictions and the decreased cost of life imprisonment as two primary reasons to abolish capital punishment despite the problems that continue to exist with the life sentence.
Purpose of Punishment
The use of criminal sentencing as a form of punishment for individuals who have violated the law has been a subject of a great deal of debate for a long period of time. Individuals who are convicted of breaking the law are sentenced to a criminal punishment which they must serve.
This punishment may range in severity from minor fines to long term incarceration. The punishment will generally depend on the goal that the Government and the judicial authority is attempting to achieve. If their primary goal is to deter the individual from committing crimes in the future and to prevent other individuals from taking part in similar criminal behavior, then the criminal’s punishment must be harsh and severe.
There are many different goals that may be accomplished through the use of criminal punishment. The severity of the punishment will often vary from one convicted criminal to another, even if the crimes that have been committed were the same. This is because the judge has the ability to consider all of the aspects of a criminal case and determine an effective punishment that is fitting for each particular defendant.
The inconsistency of criminal punishment is another topic that has raised a great deal of concern. If there is not a set and standard punishment for all individuals who commit the same crime, then there is room for prejudice and discrimination on the part of the judge.
However, the imposition of mandatory minimum sentencing laws and Federal sentencing guidelines have also caused many problems because first time offenders of certain crimes are receiving the same harsh punishment as career criminals. Criminal punishments present judicial officials with many complications which need to be addressed and resolved.
Criminal Defense
A criminal law case requires two attorneys to compete against each other in order to convince the jury to believe their individual cases. The prosecutor will be utilizing evidence and witness testimony in order to prove that the defendant is guilty of the crime in question. A criminal defense attorney will be countering all of the claims of the prosecutor and attempting to cause the jury to doubt their client's guilt.
Even if the criminal lawyer cannot prove the defendant's innocence, all he or she needs to do is provide sufficient evidence and information to make the jury question the guilt of the defendant. If the jury has any reason to doubt that the defendant is guilty then it cannot convict the defendant of a crime.
In many cases, the evidence overwhelmingly proves that a defendant is responsible for the crime of which he or she is being accused. In instances such as this, it is the responsibility of the criminal defense attorney to develop a convincing and adequate criminal defense that will negate their client's criminal culpability.
There are many different criminal defenses that criminal lawyers may choose to employ in a criminal case. Generally, these defenses seek to prove that a defendant cannot be held accountable for their crimes for a number of different reasons. In most instances, it will be because of a diminished or compromised mental state that has caused the defendant to act out of character.
Many criminal defenses surround psychological disorders that have developed in the defendant. Other defenses claim that physical, social, or environmental factors caused unusual behavior in the defendant. No matter which stance a criminal defense attorney decides to adopt, he or she must be very convincing.
A successful criminal defense will effectively negate or diminish their client’s accountability, therefore lessening the severity of their conviction and sentence.