1.)The central issue in The Right to Remain Silent revolves around how to interview and interrogate witnesses and suspects in order to gain information that could benefit your investigation. Explain your choices in this scenario by addressing the following questions.
2)Which techniques did you think were most effective during the interviews and interrogations? What was the ultimate goal of the interviews and interrogations and would you have used any different methods to achieve the said goal?
3)The central issues in Effective Counsel examine the role of the defense attorney and the choices the various members of the courtroom work group must make to ensure that the defendant receives the degree of legal support required by the U.S. Constitution. Explain your choices in this scenario by addressing the following questions:
In this scenario, what is your opinion of the prosecutor’s decision to charge Matt with the terrorism-related crime that carries a sentence of life in prison? What motivation does the prosecutor have to convince Matt to accept the offered plea bargain? Do you see any ethical problems with the prosecutor’s behavior? Explain your answers.
4)In your own words, explain why the Strickland standard makes it so difficult for defendants to claim ineffective assistance of counsel, even in cases—as we saw in this scenario—where the defense attorney falls asleep during the trial. What would be the consequences, both intended and unintended, if this legal standard were changed to focus solely on the defense attorney’s inadequate performance, regardless of the likely guilt of the defendant?
5)The central issues in Rules of Evidence revolve around the role that potentially prejudicial evidence and potentially impartial jurors play in the criminal trial. Explain your choices in this scenario by addressing the following questions:
What are the arguments in favor of withholding evidence of a defendant’s “evil character” (such as a previous conviction for online sex crimes) from the jury? What are the arguments in favor of allowing the jury to hear about such evidence? Which argument do you find more convincing? Why?
6)How does the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard increase the possibility of a hung jury in a criminal trial? Do you think that a hung jury is a fair result? What would be the positives and negatives of ending the widespread requirement that a jury’s verdict in criminal trials be unanimous? Explain your answers.
7)Describe a correctional facility that would be appropriate for individuals who have been found guilty, and also used the insanity defense. Should all individuals who use the insanity defense be required to enter mental health facilities? Why or why not?
8)What measures do you believe should be taken in order to determine if an individual “qualifies” for use of the insanity defense?
9) Why is a proper Miranda warning significant to an interview or interrogation?
Answer in at least 5 sentences
To illustrate Mill’s concern with the uncultivated making poor decision, consider the following example. Your state government determines that it has a budget surplus of $5 billion that it must spend before the end of the fiscal year. So, the legislature puts the following to a popular vote: ALL citizens currently residing in the state are entitled to either (1) a free college education; or (2) a free lifetime supply of beer. Because the “uncultivated” among you may not be able to distinguish between the “lower” good of free beer and the “higher” good of free education, do you believe that the majority of citizens would choose the beer? In what, if any, ways might decisions such as this lead to the eventual decline of the cultural and intellectual life of your state? Mill argued that we should implement a requirement that people be “competent” judges, familiar with differences, before they could vote. Do you agree? If so, how should we determine who is competent or who is not?
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|