Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

E-folio Personal 12 Angry Men To compare and contrast 1957 jury to now Guilty or not guilty. I choose Guilty because their was an eye witness saying that.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "E-folio Personal 12 Angry Men To compare and contrast 1957 jury to now Guilty or not guilty. I choose Guilty because their was an eye witness saying that."— Presentation transcript:

1 E-folio Personal 12 Angry Men To compare and contrast 1957 jury to now Guilty or not guilty. I choose Guilty because their was an eye witness saying that she saw the kid kill his father. Then, when the they found the knife. Also when the men below them heard them fighting and then heard a body fall to the floor and saw the boy running out of the room. They voted again and now they are at nine votes for not guilty and 3 for guilty. $1000 each actor made for the entire movie. I changed my vote I think he is not guilty because of the points they made for example the time it took the old man to get to the door of the kids apartment. Then, if the kid did do it the way he supposedly killed was the wrong of the knife. Another reason was when the old man figured out that the women could not have worn her glasses. So that could have blurred her vision. Then, they all decided not guilty.

2 Civil Action Movie CIVIL ACTIONS John Travolta is a personal injury lawyer. He only goes for cases that the opponent has a lot of money and that they can settle a big settlement. Small town with a group of people think the water is causing their and other kids to have a deadly sickness. They ask John to be their lawyer. He at first does not want to represent them, but when he sees what the factories are doing and how much money the factories has he then decided to represent them. Then, he starts gaining evidence by having researchers search the factories. The opponent did not take the settlement deal offered by John. So now they have to go to trial. The judge dismissed some of the charges because their was no true evidence showing that the chemicals was put into the water. So the judge asked three questions to the jury to decide if the trial should continue. John and his firm were nearly all out of money. They all sold their houses and their life insurances. They met with one of the opponent for a settlement. He offered 8 million but John declined his offer. The rest of his lawyers quit so he was on his own. He went to a local restaurant and saw a kid drop a glass of water. He realizes that he went about the case all wrong. He files for appeal. Robert Duvall is charged with hiding evidence. Then, Chessman was charged with false evidence. Then 69 million was awarded to clean up the town. Then, John gets out of debt within a year.

3 Research for Business Law You must either comply with the subpoena or, if you have an objection, you must apply to the proper court for permission to vacate or modify the subpoena. Such an application would ordinarily require the services of an attorney. First, if you feel that you may be target of a criminal investigation or that your testimony may implicate you in criminal activity, however remote, you should immediately consult an attorney. Second, if there is any question in your mind about the validity of the subpoena, you should consider challenging the subpoena by applying to the proper court before you appear at the time and place designated by the subpoena. You risk being held in contempt of court, even if the subpoena was not signed by a judge 6913_0.HTMhttp://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/hju /hju2 6913_0.HTM


Download ppt "E-folio Personal 12 Angry Men To compare and contrast 1957 jury to now Guilty or not guilty. I choose Guilty because their was an eye witness saying that."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google