In April 15, 2010 the Reed Richards Science Center in Akron burned to the ground. The Center had been conducting controversial cosmic ray experiments on rats and rabbits, and a number of animal rights groups had opposed the research. Preliminary investigations by the FBI’s Special Crimes Unit determined that there was a high level of Acetone found in the debris after the fire. Acetone is a highly flammable accelerant that can be used to help fires spread quickly through buildings. It is very rare and its distribution is tightly controlled by federal regulations.Special Agent Alicia Masters was in charge of the case. Her investigation quickly led to Storm. Storm was convicted of felony arson in 2001 after he used Acetone to burn down a chemical …show more content…
During the meeting, Storm told Masters: “You have the wrong guy. I admit I would be happy to see this clinic and every one like it burned to the ground, but I wasn’t even in Akron that night; I was in Cincinnati at the Reds game.”Storm took the stand in his own defense, and testified that he was innocent, and that he was in Cleveland at a dance club at the time of the fire. On cross-examination, the prosecutor asked him whether he told the FBI that he had been at a Cincinnati Reds game on the night of the fire; Storm denied that he said this. Storm also called Ben Grimm to the stand. Ben Grimm is a scientist who worked at the Richards Center, and he testified that the day after the fire , he was talking to his colleague Susan, who also worked at the Center. During the conversation, Susan said to Grimm: “This is all my fault. I left the cosmic ray generator on last night by accident. It must have overheated and caused the …show more content…
Special Agent Masters gave hearsay testimony about him being happy that burned to the ground. However, these Should have not been admissible under the Federal rule 801 through 807 state is not admissible unless any of the following provides otherwise the federal statute missile or other were prescribed by the Supreme Court. The statements that declared did not make while testifying in a current trial or hearing and a party off of evidence to provide the truth of the matter of rest and statements. Therefore, his statement to the special investigator about how happy was Chemical plant burn to the ground as inadmissible because it was done During interrogation Preceding And was not done in a quart. Therefore, the special agent cannot testify to what the Defended said at the time of interrogation only if the defendant 's admitted to Burning Down the facility can be used he did not admit to burning down this facility only has glad you 're that the facility was torched. The Federal rule 404 from other apps when offered to provide of other acts when offered to prove knowledge plan or some other relevant details. Is person prosecutor brought up the previous position of the defendant during the trial Which is prohibited under the federal rule 404. The Federal rule 407 excludes evidence of subsequent remedial measures when offered to
Pastor Gregory Hawkins was finally sentenced to life in prison when the judge decided that Hawkins would only continue the abuse if he were allowed to be free. Hawkins was the Pastor of Zion Plaza Church and owner of the Zion Plaza Child Learning Center. Hawkins
Name of Case: LaChance vs. Erickson Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court Parties and their roles:. LaChance, director, Office of Personnel Management petitioner; Erickson et al Responded Relevant facts: Federal employees made false statements to agency investigators with respect to their misbehavior. The legal issue(s) raised: The legal issue raised was that the respondents, federal employees were charged by their agencies because each of them made false statements to the agency investigators with respect to their misconduct.
Therefore, many times criminal prosecutors will use the FRE Rule 404 (b) and introduce that same exluded evidence under 403, into the courts and into the minds to set the jury up for an impression about the defendant in a trial in which they hope will be a great influence over the jury and leave them believing or influenced their thinking that the person standing trial must be doing or had done what it is they are accused of and being tried
Before 1942, very little was known about burn treatments. New methods were developed would help in saving many lives during the following years. If a similar structure built today were built in the same way The Cocoanut Grove was built it would definitely go through the same fate if a fire had occurred. If the structure did not have enough emergency doors or had locked ones it would make the evacuation process extremely harder leading people to panic and to several accidents and most likely deaths.
“The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street” Boom! “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street” is about an ordinary street that turns from peaceful to chaos, and how easily people can turn on each other. The plot is not realistic in “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street” because Les Goodman’s car started on its own in the 1950s, they blamed the power outage on aliens, and Charlie shot Pete Van Horn. The reason why Les Goodman’s car started on its own in the 1950s, is unrealistic is that the technology we have now did not exist back then.
Steven Avery was accused of a sexual assault that happened on July 29th, 1985. It happen in Manitowoc County, Wisconsin. The Avery family was always viewed as bad people who didn’t belong in the community. Steven was always viewed as a trouble maker but always owned up to everything he did. On his record was a burglary and participant in the crime of cruelty to an animal.
The prosecutors in the Wayne Williams case presented evidence and witnesses in the case. None of the witnesses, in this case, witnessed Wayne Williams commit any murders. The witnesses were there to testify about what they noticed Wayne Williams do, that was not normal or unusual. The testimony which was the most damaging was Angelo Foster who was a former press secretary to the mayor. He gave information about a conversation that he had with the defendant’s father.
An Opening Your Honor, the opposing counsel, members of the jury, this case is about the unreliability of evidence and an insufficiency to meet the burden of proof that is required to convict Mr. Jones and Cut-Rate Liquor with a violation of Nita Liquor Commission Regulation 3.102. This case is to be decided on four issues: 1) Knowledge. Whether the Defendant, Mr. Jones and Cut-Rate Liquor, knew or ought to have known that the customer, Mr. Watkins, was intoxicated? 2) Sale.
On balance, the probative value of evidence of Ms. Fitzgerald’s drug use is extremely high and substantially outweighs any risk of either unfair prejudice or undue delay. IV. MS. FITZGERALD’S PRIOR DURG US IS EXEMPT FROM THE PROHIBITON ON HEARSAY UNDER RULE
Case: New Jersey v. T.L.O. (1985) Facts: A high school freshman (T.L.O) had her purse searched by the Assistant Vice Principal at her school because a teacher found her and another student smoking in the lavatory. The Assistant Vice Principal uncovered cigarettes and marijuana. Procedural history: T.L.O. motioned to suppress the evidence because her Fourth Amendment rights were violated and was denied by the Juvenile Court stating the search was reasonable. The Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court agreed there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment. The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the decision stating the search was unreasonable.
However, this story of Mrs. Stephens being helpless is all the defense has. But how can you, the jury, believe a story from a woman that would lie to doctors, to police,
The prosecution is charging the defendant Alex palmer with first degree murder of Jes Markson. Critical aspects of four witness testimonies will be analyzed and discussed. Furthermore, the prosecution will explain the importance of each testimony and how the testimony helps link the Defendant Alex Palmer to the crime. The first witness Detective Dana Brown should state that she has been working for the Hollywood police department for eighteen years, seven of which have been as a detective. Disclosure of this information to the jury will help establish her credibility.
In document A “The Supreme Court rule that the warrantless search was valid because otherwise, Carrol might drive away and the evidence would disappear. In this case,the warrantless search was found to be constitutional. ”However In this case the warrantless search was not constitutional because the evidence was not disappearing. DLK was growing more than 100 marijuana plants meaning he had a sizable business, and he would most likely grow more after selling them.
On 3-19-16, Highway Patrolman Jeremiah Byrd had a traffic stop. The vehicle was occupied by the alleged perpetrators and the alleged victims. The children were in restraint in the maroon Chevrolet Suburban 1500, traveling East on I10, near the mile marker 61. Judith gave the officer a Texas ID card, and it was suspended. Ramiro also have a driver license to the officer.
Roy Brown also was a suspect because he had made threatening calls to her before the crime. He was put in jail for 1-3 years. The crime that took place was at night by one person near her farm sted.