1. From the e-Activity, give your opinion of Jack Kevorkian’s saying,
“dying is not a crime”, and analyze the manner in which his actions rose
to the level of homicide. Provide one (1) example of his actions that
meet the elements of a homicide.
Read the article, titled “The Life and Deaths of Jack Kevorkian (1928–2011)”, located at http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2075644,00.html#ixzz2s1VqmyIt.
2. Review State v. Lamy, 969 A.2d 451 (N.H. 2009) and the born alive
requirement that are discussed in Chapter 10 of the text, determine one
(1) ethical issue that may arise from social debate as a result of the
requirement in question. Next, speculate upon one (1) approach that the
court could take in order to address the ethical issue in question.
Justify your response.
3.From the e-Activity, summarize at least two (2) arguments presented
for and against granting Sandusky’s motion for a new criminal trial.
Identify the most likely factors that you believe would support the
judge’s decision to grant a new trial. Provide a rationale for your
Go to the ESPN College Football Website and read the article titled, “Jerry Sandusky wants new trial”. Be prepared to discuss.
4. In the event that Sandusky were to be granted a new trial, discuss
two (2) specific aspects of the case that you believe the defense and
prosecuting attorneys would alter in their new arguments. Provide a
rationale for your response.
5. John, a married, law-abiding, father of two children is serving as a
juror in a trial where a child had been murdered. Determine the
significant impact that a juror from the described demographic could
potentially have in the outcome of this particular criminal trial.
Provide rationale in your response.
6. Analyze at least three (3) overall differences between criminal and
civil court proceedings. Discuss the fundamental reasons why you believe
that these differences are the most notable. Justify your response.