Free Speech

            Part 1

            I support the notion because rude gestures like demonstrating the middle finger to a cop is an insulting gesture which is meant at expressing provoking and disdain reactions.  These actions should get one arrested because even though people have the right to expression it does not mean that they should respond to rude gestures to others (Lefevre, & Castro, 2011).  This forms of gestures are not dignified approaches of expressing what one feels.  An individual should adopt other ways of resolving their differences if they thus feel that the services provided are inadequate or if they believe that the reaction of the other party is unjust.

            Rude gestures would at times represent fighting words because they are a form of threat. This is because shows disrespect which may thus trigger the development of fight of words or even physical because of the offenses that they cause on the affected individual (Lefevre, & Castro, 2011). In addition waving the centre finger to an officer is may be a form of a threat since individuals are from different cultural backgrounds and therefore the insult may be interpreted differently.  This gesture, therefore, constitutes of abusive words because it not only affects the emotions of the cops.  The gesture is widely known as an insult and therefore in efforts to express how one feels this is a form of a criminal act. Although the constitution provides opportunities for people to express themselves it does not allow rude gestures to be utilized in expressing discontent (Lefevre, & Castro, 2011). The officer additionally as the right to express what they feel and these forms of the gesture may thus result in undesired outcomes because they may trigger anger (Lefevre, & Castro, 2011).

            Part 2

            Libel and slander are different in that libel is a form of defamation that exists in written form while slander is mostly in verbal form (Gardner, & Anderson, 2014). Both verbal and written forms are considered as defamation which is distribution of false information which causes damages to the reputation of an individual, subject or group libel an individual is required to provide evidence that the information distributed caused others t develop dislike against them due to the message that was made and therefore prove that the information was inaccurate or wrong. However for the slander, the defendant is not required to prove that the message was wrong and the burden of proof is left on the plaintiff in providing that what they hold is true (Gardner, & Anderson, 2014).  Similarly, both libel and slander defamation has to demonstrate that the information caused contempt against the defendant. An example of a slander is New York and attorney Wooldridge who holds cases of individual celebrities who seeks compensation due to defamation.

            Part 3

            Hawley Crippen an American doctor was convicted in 1910 in England for dismembering and poisoning his wife.  The murder execution was huge enough as it made global headlines (Wilkie, 2015). This was the first media trial landmark and also the first to be intervened by forensic scientist as technological advancement was slowly growing. Cora had disappeared under unstated and unclear situations during a dinner party in their house (Wilkie, 2015). Crippen told friends that she had gone back to her family and a later died from illness.  When investigation stated due to suspicions from friends he claimed that she run away to her lover and he later fled. When instigations revealed that he had poisoned his wife he was sentenced to death and then tried to appeal the case. For a decade, the case remained as changed John Trestrail discovered that the case had not been fully discovered (Wilkie, 2015).

            His investigation, therefore, concluded that the body did not belong to Cora which was established after a DNA test was conducted on the collected body tissues (Wilkie, 2015).  The DNA failed to match and further discoveries were made that the body never belonged to a female gender and therefore he was a male victim.  John Trestrail got suspicious that Crippen had hidden 99 percent of the body part and failed to hide 1% (Wilkie, 2015).  After the discoveries, he later turned back to the court and police archives.  A latter was found in which Cora had written to Crippen that she was not ready to save him from prosecution. This, therefore, demonstrated that the police might have tempered with the provide evidence. These findings have thus facilitated the Crippen’s family to pardon him and return his bones to his native nation American as Crippen may have been flamed (Wilkie, 2015). This case is important to criminal justice because it is crucial in unveiling mistakes that are committed when the right procedures are not followed.

 

 

            References

Gardner, T. J., & Anderson, T. M. (2014). Criminal law.

Lefevre, R., & Castro, D. (2011). Rude hand gestures of the world: A guide to offending without words. San Francisco: Chronicle Books.

Lorean Wilkie. (2015). Secrets of the Dead S08E03 Executed In Error. Retrieved From             https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7sG9CpVKZE