Final thought of the Class

This class has been quite an insight to the American law for me; I am someone who hasn’t really paid attention to any laws, whether I’m in South Africa or America. I feel that the American law is strong and necessary when it needs to be, but sometimes they just waste everyone’s time with stupid little incidences! I’m still not completely sure exactly what’s what when it comes to the law, because I find it becomes a little confusing and it requires more time spent on the subject for me to actually be able to talk about it and know what I’m talking about! I completed all of the quizzes, well before the due date and I finished everyone one of them. The EOC’s I found some to be very interesting and some to be difficult to understand and therefore I couldn’t express myself properly because I wasn’t quite sure what I was talking about! The midterms, I found to be very appropriate and logical! I think that on the questions I got wrong, I might have been confused with the other multiple choice answers because it may have seemed like 2 or 3 of the options could have been the answers. I thought that the way technology was used to hand in work and complete the class was very clever, but I personally can’t stand blogs and they can be just as much rubbish as face book or twitter! The whole being on time thing at first kind of annoyed me, but then I came to understand that that is what will be expected of me in the real world, just for the record, I never come late to any of my classes unless I have a particular problem. When it came to the final project, I felt worried because I understand the basics of the case and what was going on, but I didn’t know how to put it in my own words exactly and using particular words and phrases from the book. Therefore that made writing quotes difficult because I didn’t know what exactly I was looking for!! As for my grade I’m sitting on 90% at the moment and, I really think I disserve at least a B, because, I was present all the time, I did the work, I completed the quizzes, and yes I may have a had a bit of trouble with the final project, but I think you can expect that from someone who really doesn’t know much about the law and all the technical ins and outs, I found it quite confusing and complex. Overall I think that the class was conducted extremely well and that it’ll help me in the future from an employee rating point of view, but I think I still have a lot to learn and understand when it comes to the law. I guess it was alot to take it, while doing 8 other classes! Thank you Frank!

Justices ruled for the majority!!

For such a young offender, the deterrence rationale is equally unacceptable. The Department of Justice Statistics indicates that about 98% of the arrests for willful homicide involved persons who were over 16 at the time of the offense. Therefore the justices who ruled against the majority thought that the exclusion of younger persons from the class that is eligible for the death penalty will not diminish the deterrent value of capital punishment for the vast majority of potential offenders. And even with respect to those under 16 years of age, it is obvious that the potential deterrent value of the death sentence is insignificant for two reasons. The likelihood that the teenage offender has made the kind of cost-benefit analysis that attaches any weight to the possibility of execution is so remote as to be virtually nonexistent. And, even if one posits such a cold-blooded calculation by a 15-year-old, it is fanciful to believe that he would be deterred by the knowledge that a small number of persons his age have been executed during the 20th century. In short, we are not persuaded that the imposition of the death penalty for offenses committed by persons less than 16 years of age has made, or can be expected to make, any measurable contribution to the goals that capital punishment is intended to achieve. It is, therefore, "nothing more than the purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering," Coker v. Georgia, and thus an unconstitutional punishment.

My Opinion

I agree with the argument, as from my own experiences, when you’re a youngster, you can easily influenced by anything and anyone. As they discussed in the case, many juveniles that perform these crimes and acts of violence, are often affected by their family or social life where they could be victims of society’s neglect or are severely impaired cognitively and emotionally. These kids have no one to go to, to talk to, to ask and even to love; therefore they turn to others who may be in the same situation, except they are older and smarter! These older and smarter kids, over power and bribe the younger members of society into doing things that they don’t want to do because they know the consequences of those particular actions, therefore they have someone to do it for them! In this Court case, I think it was only fair to let William Wayne Thompson off the hook, as he was most probably convinced to come along and help them as he was the brother of the victim’s wife! However I think after seeing that Thompson had " a history of juvenile offenses, and witnesses from the juvenile justice system testified that he was not amenable to rehabilitation"(Flaherty, Lois T, Adolescent Psychiatry, 2002) I think that it would only serve him right, to be given the death sentence if he ever committed an act of violence similar to this one, as it just wouldn’t make sense to keep letting him off and finally after prison, back into society where he could possible do it again as he might think that he can get away with murder whenever he likes!

Rule of Law

The amid curiae brief is a forceful statement of why the death penalty should not be imposed on persons who commit crimes as juveniles. ASAP has reaffirmed its stand in an updated position statement, which also appears in this section. Questioning of capital punishment appears to be increasing among the general public and other professional organizations. In 2000, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry issued a position paper condemning the death penalty for adolescents and the American Psychiatric Association followed suit in 2001. ASAP will continue to campaign that the death penalty for juveniles violates "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" (findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3882/is.../ai_n9032640)

Reasoning of the court

The two briefs argued that, because of their immature development and severe psychopathology, juvenile offenders should not be subject to the death penalty. The briefs pointed out that, relative to adults, teenagers are impulsive and lacking in judgment. They are thus unlikely to carefully consider the consequences of their behavior, and the death penalty has no value as a deterrent for them. According to the court, "the likelihood that the teenage offender has made the kind of coldblooded, cost-benefit analysis that attaches any weight to the possibility of execution is virtually nonexistent"; the court added, "It is fanciful to believe that a 15 year old would be deterred by the knowledge that a small number of persons his age have been executed during the 20th century". The second argument is that violent juvenile offenders are even more impaired than normal adolescents-having as a rule been the victims of abuse and other noxious influences. As a consequence, they suffer from neurologic and mental illnesses that impair their judgment and thinking even beyond the immature functioning of normal adolescents. As stated in the brief, "Adolescents who commit murder suffer from serious psychological and family disturbances which exacerbate the already existing vulnerabilities of youth"(http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=487&invol=815)

Decision of the court

The case was argued on November 9, 1987, and was decided on June 29, 1988, by a 5-3 vote, which overturned the death sentence and moved the case to the lower court. In its ruling, the Supreme Court stated "The Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit the execution of a person who was under 16 years of age at the time of his or her offense."(http://www.enotes.com/supreme-court-drama/thompson-v-oklahoma) However, only four of the justices fully agreed with this ruling. Justice John P. Stevens announced the judgment of the court and delivered an opinion in which Justices William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, and Harry A. Blackmun joined. These four judges found that the execution of a 15 year old offender would be cruel and unusual in all cases. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor agreed with their decision to overturn Thompson's death sentence, but not because she agreed that the death penalty was a cruel and unusual punishment for a juvenile. Rather, she objected to it because Oklahoma's death penalty statute set no minimum age limit at which the death penalty could be imposed. She found that the sentencing of a 15-year-old to death under this type of statute failed to meet the standard for special care and deliberation required in all capital cases. This set the stage for the court's later decision that, if a state set a specific minimum age, the death penalty was allowable for anyone over that age.

ILLICIT

After watching Illicit, I have realized just how corrupt the world we live in really is. This is not something which happened years ago or has gotten better, it is happening now, TODAY, and it seems to have gotten even worse. Politicians becoming criminals and criminals be coming politicians, what on earth is the world coming to. Everyone has bought a knock off a couple times and think it’s no big deal. I have bought a few minor things which I have eventually said to myself, “next time, I’m going to buy the real deal!” But I guess it’s just a really good feeling getting something which you know would cost a lot more, for a lot less. But then seeing that the knock offs are not only being shipped all over the world, but also that drugs are being smuggled into the shipment, because no one would suspect a bunch of fancy, expensive Chanel handbags to contains a couple kilos of cocaine and what not. Thinking about when I could be buying a knock off, someone else could be dying or getting killed, kind of makes you feel responsible for the life of that person. In the movie and from my personal experience, these things happen in either third world countries or in bad parts of certain cities and it really sucks to think that drug dealers and shops with knock offs are also giving these places a reputation which could ruin the city or country. I would never go to Columbia, just from seeing it in the movie, but it’s probably got a really beautiful side to it, which I don’t know about!

Issues of the Case

Thompson's three accomplices, all of whom were over 18, were convicted and sentenced to death for this crime. Thompson was waived to adult court after a hearing requested by the prosecutor and was found guilty and sentenced to death. Thompson had a history of juvenile offenses, and witnesses from the juvenile justice system testified that he would not be cured in rehabilitation. A psychologist hired by the prosecution performed a cursory evaluation, handwrote a four-page report, and testified that Thompson was "an antisocial personality disorder" with a callous disregard for others who had no capacity for change(http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3882/is_200201/ai_n9032640/). Therefore creating the problem that Thompson was underage, so he could not be given the death, therefore what sort of punishment does this kid diserve!

Whats the problem with Spam????

SPAM may seem like a bit of fun and a fast way to make a quick buck to some people, but in reality, it just gets you in a lot of trouble. No matter what, someone will find out and they will catch you, it’s just a matter of time! It can be extremely dangerous from a legal perspective, as authorities are put in a blind spot, by which they have no idea with who they are dealing with and how deeply involved this person or these people could be. A person sending out SPAM emails, could be extremely dangerous or an absolute nutcase!! Then again with particular types of SPAM, they could actually be extremely confusing or complicated to the authorities, because maybe the person isn’t doing a single thing illegal and that puts the authorities in a weird or dangerous position in which they could either a suspect down and solve a problem or they could make a mistake, by invading a suspects privacy and risk being sued, which would have a huge impact on the particular area, whether it be a county, a state or a country! Impacts such as the public losing their respect for authorities and the rest of the world, looks at them in a disgusted way, creating a negative frame of mind towards that area!!!

Pacific Heights

In this movie, the landlords are forced into a position where they can’t prove that their Tenant is not paying rent and have nothing to evict him immediately with and as the law says, there has to be a 30 day eviction notice, so that the tenant is notified. He is disturbing the other tenants as well as the landlords themselves and at he same time, the landlords can’t afford to pay the mortgage on their home, because of this troublesome tenant. The cops say it is illegal for a landlord to refuse the Tenant water and electricity, if he has moved into the property. I would tend to think that as a landlord, if your tenant is constantly giving you trouble, disturbing you and not paying his monthly rent, you have every right to evict them immediately, because, it doesn’t just affect the other tenants in the building with his disturbing and all, but it affects you with your bills you have to pay!

Facts of the Case

Thompson V. Oklahoma

At the age of 15, William Thompson brutally murdered his brother-in-law, who had been abusing his sister. According to Oklahoma law, Thompson was a minor and must be tried as one, thereby receiving a reduced sentence and other considerations. Due to the gravity of the crime, the prosecutor requested an order which would allow the boy to be tried as an adult. In order to do this, the prosecution had to demonstrate that the case had merit and that the chance for rehabilitation of the child within the juvenile system was slim. http://library.thinkquest.org/2760/thompson.htm

3's about me

Three Names I have been called:
Tristram, South Africa, Safa
Three Jobs I have had in my life (include unpaid if you have to):
Deckhand, Backstage crew, Boat restoration
Three Places I Have Lived:
South Africa, Mauritius, USA
Three TV Shows that I watch:
Prison Break, The Mentalist, It’s always sunny in Philadelphia
Three places I have been:
Seychelles, England, France
People that e-mail me regularly:
Girlfriend, Dad, Cousin
Three of my favorite foods:
Chinese, Japanese, Italian
Three cars I have driven:
Mustang GT, Audi A4, Ford F150
Three things I am looking forward to:
Graduation, Vacation, Making money

Greed........ good or bad?

I guess in a way Greed is a good thing, if you’re doing it in a respectful way and it’s not affecting other people. Then again on Wall Street it sounds like every businessmen is ripping someone off in some way or other! Using people and their money to better your own life, is just not a nice at all. Even when you’re not doing anything illegal, but you’re still using innocent citizens to make a better living, is saying something about yourself, they honestly don’t seem to give a shit about anyone else! So greed actually gets many people into all kinds of trouble when they don’t deserve it. In the movie “Wall Street”, Charlie Sheen gets screwed over by Michael Douglas and to see such a trusting and loyal person be taken for a ride like that is something quite inhuman. Greed for money is something which the world could do without, because it only creates problems and angry citizens.
If I was to make a Whack a Doll of someone, I would make it a George Bush Whack a doll, just because he’s got the funniest face and those big ears and he deserves to be a on an object like that, who wouldn’t want a Whack around doll of George Bush, its brilliant!!!

What my classmates think of the legal system????

I think the government in general has too much bearing on our lives as individuals, I think there are many issues in this country today in which it should be left up to the individual to decided whether its right or wrong (Jonathan Boyer)
I absolutely agree with Jonathan on this one, because so much time and money is wasted on stupid little incidences that really is not such a big deal. If the government spent more time concentrating on more serious things around the country then maybe they can achieve more to make the country a better place and become an idol to the other countries all over the world.

The system seems quite simple until you start to really read between the lines. (Jaqueline Hernandez)
This is so true as well because you don’t really realize how much nonsense and administration work there is until you actually study about it or get involved with the Law. I mean there are so many people with power that could simplify cases or situations with a simple flick of a thumb, but the authorities would rather make life hell for people in such minor cases.

The legal system we know however in practice is a completely different situation. The very system that our forefathers painstakingly put together using some of the world’s best examples of government as a guide, has been Swiss cheesed in order to allow some and not all as was intended to benefit. (Rocco M. Zappia)
I like the way Rocco thinks, because he is absolutely correct about how the law is not put into practice the way it is in theory and for the authorities to bend the law to suit themselves is (excuse my French) a little FUCKED UP!! It’s not fair on the public.

Used Cars crimes and torts

Tristan, Adrian, Angel, Jordan
Crime1 Assault with a deadly weapon
Crime 2 Illegal distribution of stolen goods
Crime 3 Bribery
Crime 4 Perjury
Crime 5 Solicitation of drugs
Tor t6 Vandalism
Crime 7 Battery
Crime 8 Speeding
Crime 9 Hit n run
Crime 10 Not yielding to a construction worker
Crime 11 Obstruction of justice
Tort 12 Contempttort 13 False accusation
Crime 14 Driving in a non designated area
Crime 15 No seatbelts
Crime 16 False advertising
Tort 17 Judge is incompetent to run court
tort 18 Destruction of property
tort 19 Illegal tampering with private property
Crime 20 Sexual harassment
Tort 21 Trespassing
Crime 22 Stopping on a freeway
Crime 23 Selling goods without a license
Crime 24 Not safely secured in the vehicles cab
Crime 25 not yielding for a cop
Crime 26 disorderly conduct in a courtroom
Crime 27 driving on the wrong side of the road
Crime 28 driving without insurance
Crime 29 False Documentation
Crime 30 Attempt at monopoly
Tort 31 Selling under a false pretense
tort 32 defamation of character
Crime 33 under aged driving
Crime 34 assault
Crime 35 illegal gambling
Tort 36 slander
Crime 37 trade libel
Crime 38 Holding a hostage
Tort 39 Negligence

What I think of the legal system.

To be completely honest I don’t know much about the legal system here at all, but from what I have learnt since being here is that there are a lot of unnecessary complications which can be avoided to make things easier for innocent Non-US citizens. There are many rules and regulations which create problems and make like harder for a Non-US citizen. I understand that the authorities are doing what they can to keep America safe and I completely respect that, but surely there are some regulations which could be toned down for the Non-US citizens. But based on what I have seen since I got here, I think that the legal systems tend to make small situations, extremely big situations for no reason and both parties could save money, if they left out some of the unnecessary procedures.
When watching the news, I have often seen comments or statements of particular people in the country that are being accused of something, that they haven’t done and its really annoying the way the news shows seem to push the subject and take things too far and making up their own ideas. “Libel is the spreading of damaging statements in written form – including pictures, cartoons and, effigies” (Essentials of Business Law, Anthony L. Liuzzo, Pg47)

MySpace Hoax and Absence of Malice

I absolutely agree with the Meiers feelings towards the Lori Drew, I feel that she deserves to go to prison for performing libel and slander towards a 13 year old girl, that already has problems at such a young age. It’s horrible to think that a mother could be so cruel to a young teenager who is battling in society and make her believe that a guy is interested in and then reject her for no apparent reason. In Absence of Malice, the way the detective places the file to get the newspaper reporter to read the file without him giving out any official information about the case at all, was very clever. I think Mike Gallagher has the right to sue, as soon as he finds out who claimed that he is under investigation. He could sue for libel he is an innocent man. He has every right to be pissed off about the newspaper printing rubbish information about him. The newspaper and the reporter are lucky that they don’t have to reveal their sources as they would definitely be in trouble. I guess it is just a reporter’s job to obtain as much information as possible and the newspapers job to print it, but I think particular cases that you aren’t entirely sure about, should definitely be verified. I don’t know what more to say to this as it is a very complicated situation, as everything depends on the final outcome and what decisions are to be made with regard to the newspaper, the reporter and the detective for leaving the file so openly on his desk.
When you compare these two storys, one which is a movie and the other a real life situation, you can see exactly how something such as libel can affect the emotions and reactions of the victim.

What I think about lawyers!!!

I have shared feelings about lawyers, because each lawyer has a different approach and a different feeling towards his/her job and the clients that they work for! Overall I consider lawyers to be a sneaky, selfish bunch as that’s exactly what they turn out to be most of the time. They care too much about money and not enough about the lives and feelings of their clients. I don’t like the way they put themselves in a judges good books in order to profit themselves by winning the case, I just feel that it is entirely unfair on the opposition and even more so if everyone knows that the plaintiff is actually guilty. It must be the worst feeling to lose a case that you know is legitimate. Then again you get the lawyers, which do actually respect their clients and want to help them. I respect these lawyers, because they have enough balls to help the people they know are right and have a legitimate case. I respect the lawyers that get a satisfaction out of seeing the joy and smiles of their clients and knowing that they really helped out people that deserved it. Then again each lawyer is just doing his/her job in order to maintain a healthy and fulfilling lifestyle and provide for the family, so I guess you can’t blame them sometimes for doing what’s right for themselves.