Carson v. Wilson In the given case, Carson v. Wilson, there are several issues that should be identified and taken into account. First of all it is necessary to say that Lisa Carson was charged with manslaughter. It should be pointed that in the United States manslaughter is considered to be criminally negligent homicide. Manslaughter is not as serious a crime as murder. But the woman was arrested 15 years ago for domestic violence. Should this fact be admitted into evidence? From the juridical point of view the evidence is not admissible but can be accepted as admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent (Rule 404) Having examined the case, it becomes clear that there are some facts that should be taken into account.
According to the definition, manslaughter is the unlawful killing but without malice (Legal Encyclopedia).
It always happens upon a sudden heat. Manslaughter can be divided into voluntary and involuntary. It is known that voluntary manslaughter happens when a defendant is provoked to commit the homicide. But it is important that a defendant probably have intent to cause death or serious injury. (Legal Encyclopedia )Thats why though additional circumstances (such as provocation) can mitigate the killing; but a person who is charged with voluntary manslaughter can be treated as an unbalanced one. Thats why his psychological state should be taken into account in further. In the case Carson v.
Wilson, the defendant was charged with voluntary manslaughter, so with an intentional killing. Provocation was used as a type of defense in court. Most of all, it was considered reasonable by the court, because there was not a time period between the provocation and the killing within which a reasonable person would cool off. Sometimes the defendant’s temperament is taken into account. It influences a subjective decision as to whether the person had sufficient time to regain self-control. The prosecution was sure that provocation was not the only reason of the event.
The Essay on Criticisms of Murder and Voluntary Mansalughter
Murder is the most serious form of unlawful homicide. Murder is a common law offence, and has never been defined by statute. The most commonly accepted definition is the one given by the early 17th century judge, Sir Edward Coke. He defined murder as: ‘The unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being under the Queens peace with malice aforethought, express or implied. ’ The actus reus of ...
The prosecution tried to prove that the defendant had inadequate behavior earlier. The woman was arrested for domestic violence to a previous spouse. An injury to persons in a close relationship to the accused, such as a spouse, child, or parent, is often held to constitute reasonable provocation.(Legal Encyclopedia) But in most situations, evidence of previous criminal convictions is inadmissible. With the purpose to prove or disprove an issue in the case, a system of rules and standards is used. It helps to determine which facts may be admitted, and to what extent a judge or jury may consider those facts, as proof of a particular issue in a lawsuit. The official rules in federal court proceedings are the Federal Rules of Evidence.
They serve as a guide for judges and attorneys. The Federal Rules of Evidence influence jurys making factual conclusions in a trial. So, according to these rules, Rule 404. Character Evidence Not Admissible To Prove Conduct: (b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts.Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial. (Rule 404.) So, the womans prior arrest cannot be admitted into evidence, but can be regarded as proof of intent and preparation. Another issue deals with the womans reputation.
The Report on Parole Evidence Rule
How justified is the fact that Parole Evidence Rule has outlived its importance in the modern day life? Rules of Evidence govern the facts that are receivable in litigation being criminal or civil. The rules outline the general requirements but however there are exceptions to the general rules. The question of admissibility is a critical issue and evidence can be either admissible or inadmissible. ...
As it is known that the prosecution had a witness who could testify that the woman is known for her bad reputation as a loud and scandalous person. Can this evidence be admitted? As a rule, evidences of a persons character or a trait of character is considered inadmissible. But the persons reputation can be taken into account in the form of an opinion. Speaking about admissibility, it is necessary to say about relevant evidence. According to the definition relevant evidence means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence. (Rule 401).
The next rule states that “All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided.” (Rule 402) It was created with the purpose to keep out all evidence that is immaterial or lacks probative value, but at the same time it gives an opportunity to the both sides to present all necessary evidence that bears on the issue to be decided. It is evident that probability of evidence plays an important part in the process of making the decision. The object of the law of evidence is to assure a high probability that questions of fact are resolved correctly. Thats why judges prefer direct evidence (such as an official document or a witness’s assertion of immediate knowledge of the question at issue) to indirect or circumstantial evidence, which merely tends to establish the issue by proving surrounding circumstances from which the principal fact may be inferred. (Legal Encyclopedia) It can be proven from psychological point of view. As a rule evidences are often presented in a tense, emotional atmosphere in a courtroom long after the event in question took place.
To that end, material introduced at the trial is ordinarily restricted to items of great probative value; that which may arouse unreasoning passion is ordinarily excluded. The testimony of witnesses is the most common form of evidence. As a rule, a witness actually viewed the crime or other event at issue; or a person who has relevant information. In the case Carson v. Wilson the witness has additional information about the defendant traits of character. So, it is evident the prosecutor wants the witness to testify psychological deviation of the defendant.
The Essay on Barn Burning Abner Snopes Character Analysis
William Faulkners short story Barn Burning describes a typical relationship between wealthy people and poor people during the Civil War. The main character, Abner Snopes, sharecrops to make a living for his family. He despises wealthy people. Out of resentment for wealthy people, he goes and burns their barns to get revenge. Abners character over the course of the story is unchanging in that he is ...
But To be admissible, testimony must be limited to matters of which the witness has personal knowledge, meaning matters the witness learned about using any of his or her senses. (Wikipedia) A witness can be a lay witness (not testifying as an expert).
In this case the witness should base the testimony on facts and not on opinions or inferences. But the opinions or inferences can be “(a) rationally based on the perception of the witness and (b) helpful to a clear understanding of the witness’ testimony or the determination of a fact in issue” (Rule 701).
So, the witness should prove the evidence with the facts; otherwise the testimony will be considered as hearsay. There is the rule in the Federal Rules of Evidence that points methods of proving character: Rule 405.
(a) Reputation or opinion.In all cases in which evidence of character or a trait of character of a person is admissible, proof may be made by testimony as to reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination, inquiry is allowable into relevant specific instances of conduct. (Rule 405) And the rule 404 firms: (a) Character evidence generally.Evidence of a persons character or a trait of character is not admissible for the purpose of proving action in conformity therewith on a particular occasion (Rule 404) Having examined the material, it is necessary to make a conclusion that the both evidence are not admissible and cannot be regarded as direct or circumstantial evidence the case of manslaughter.
Bibliography:
Admissible evidence. (2006) Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved Sept.17, 2006 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/evidence Federal Rules of Evidence. ( 2004).
The Committee on the Judiciary House of Representatives, December 31, 2004. Manslaughter. (2006).
Legal Encyclopedia. Answers Corporation. Retrieved Sept. 17, 2006 from http://www.answers.com/topic/manslaughter Saks & Duizend.
(1983).
The Use of Scientific. Evidence in Litigation, NCSC..
