Child victims of sexual abuse can testify via one-way, closed-circuit television, as their presence in open court might prove to be too traumatic.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
Case Study 3<\/h2>\n\n\n\n News of the murder of celebrity Susan Lamb\u2019s husband at the couple\u2019s winter home in a small town in a northern state traveled like wildfire. Harold Lamb had been discovered in the hallway, shot twice in the chest and once in the head. The story broke the morning of the murder, and by that evening, the story was splashed all over the news. When police arrested Susan Lamb, the story grew even bigger. Media hordes gathered outside the small-town courthouse, so thick that court staff could hardly break through to get inside. Tabloids had already convicted Lamb, splashing stories of rumored affairs, drug binges, and past crimes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Judge Serena Delaney was worried that the media attention would contaminate the jury pool. There might be a few residents living off the grid up in the mountains who had not heard about the murder, but the townspeople could not leave their front doors without some reporter asking them what they thought of Susan Lamb. Lamb\u2019s team of attorneys had considered applying for a change of venue, but since news of the murder dominated the news night after night, they doubted that they would be able to find a juror who had not heard of the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The trial date was set for nine months from the date of arraignment. In addition, Judge Delaney ordered the defense attorneys, the lone witness, the prosecutors, and law enforcement officers not to release to the media information that could prejudice the jury or make statements inadmissible. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
When the time came to question potential jurors, the small mountain town proved that it had decent, sensible people who were able to set aside what they had heard about the case and \u201crender a verdict based on the evidence presented in court.\u201d However, in order to make sure that jurors did not learn anything about the case from the outside media while the trial was in progress, Judge Delaney ordered that they be sequestered. Surprisingly, the trial went smoothly. Susan Lamb was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Questions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n 1. What are the dangers associated with a celebrity trial?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Answer<\/span>+<\/span><\/button><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n
A highly publicized investigation can result in contaminating the jury pool. Before being selected, prospective jurors could have absorbed news and gossip about the crime and determined the guilt or innocence of the defendant before the trial has even started.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
2. How were these dangers counteracted?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Answer<\/span>+<\/span><\/button><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n
The trial date was set for nine months after the indictment, in hopes that time would help to quell the publicity surrounding the murder. Judge Delaney barred those associated with the case from revealing details to the media. Potential jurors were examined for evidence of bias. The jurors were then sequestered, to keep them from media reports while the trial was under way.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
3. What is the due process standard for impartiality among the jurors? How is this determined?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Answer<\/span>+<\/span><\/button><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n
The due process standard for jury selection is whether the \u201cjuror can lay aside his impression or opinion and render a verdict based on evidence presented in court.\u201d Jurors are not required to be ignorant of the case, but they are required to approach the trial without preconceived ideas about guilt or innocence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
Case Study 4<\/h2>\n\n\n\n When it came time to sentence Susan Lamb for the brutal murder of her husband (see prior Case Study), prosecutors sought the death penalty. In the trial, it had come out that Susan Lamb had been carrying on an affair with a neighbor. The neighbor testified that Susan Lamb had suggested killing her husband as a way to get out of a prenuptial agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The prosecution proved that Susan Lamb had plotted her husband\u2019s murder for months and had chosen a moment for the murder that she thought would ensure that she would not be charged. She shot her husband three times, twice in the chest and once in the head. Her plans for escaping without detection, however, were foiled, however, when a lone witness saw her leaving the scene of the crime, covered in blood. Had she succeeded in getting away with the crime, Susan Lamb would have received a substantial financial reward from her husband\u2019s life insurance policy and would have been free of the prenuptial agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Prosecutors argued that in addition to the wanton depravity of the crime, Susan Lamb had also committed premeditated murder. In the mountain state where the crime took place, this made the crime eligible for the death penalty. The defense argued that Susan Lamb\u2019s relationship with her husband was strained. They admitted that Susan Lamb had been carrying on an affair, but her husband had also cheated on her and was lately threatening to divorce her. The husband had once hit Susan Lamb hard enough to send her to the hospital. Prior to the murder, Susan Lamb had never been convicted of a crime, and she was known for doing charitable work for needy children. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Judge Delaney weighed the facts and the severity of the crime, and decided to sentence Susan Lamb to life in prison without the possibility of parole.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Questions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n 1. What makes a crime eligible for the death penalty? What did prosecutors focus on in arguing for it? What Amendment comes into play here?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Answer<\/span>+<\/span><\/button><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n
The death penalty may be imposed only for crimes that result, or that are intended to result, in the taking of a human life. The Supreme Court has repeatedly invalidated state statutes that authorize the death penalty for crimes such as rape or kidnapping where the victim is not killed. Unless a human life is taken, the Eighth Amendment prohibits imposition of the death penalty. In imposing the death penalty, aggravating factors must be present. In this case, Susan Lamb had committed premeditated murder. In the state where she was tried, the death penalty can be imposed for premeditated murder.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
2. What are factors that can cause a judge to decide against imposing the death penalty? What did the defense focus on in arguing against the death penalty for Susan Lamb?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Answer<\/span>+<\/span><\/button><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n
In arguing against the death penalty, the defense introduced mitigating circumstances, such as Susan Lamb\u2019s clean record before the murder, including her work with children and evidence of spousal abuse. Judge Delaney weighed the evidence and decided that life without parole would be a fitting punishment for Lamb.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
3. Why was the sentence imposed after the guilt phase of the trial had concluded?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
Answer<\/span>+<\/span><\/button><\/h3>\n\n\n\n\n
The sentencing phase must be kept separate from the guilt phase because during the sentencing phase, evidence such as the defendant\u2019s prior record and character is irrelevant for the crime for which he or she is on trial. This information would prove highly prejudicial to the jury.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Case Study 1 John Smith, a 20-year-old defendant, was charged with rape and murder. Sadie Lennon had been discovered in her apartment, brutally raped, with her head severed. When police arrested Smith, he exhibited strange behavior, arguing with people who weren\u2019t there and hitting himself. At one point, he picked up the table and flung…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":26,"featured_media":0,"parent":338,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-378","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t