Saturday, July 17, 2010

Wrongful Death and American Law

Wrongful death is an interesting concept in modern American law. If one person causes the death of another through negligence, direct action, or inaction, they can be held responsible in civil and criminal courts of law. These claims can arise from a number of different circumstances, such as through a car accident, a defective or dangerous product, careless use of firearms, serving contaminated food, or countless other shocks flesh is heir to.

The need for wrongful death laws arose because obviously there would be no way for a dead person to take legal action against the entity that caused their demise, so courts established a way for those that were deprived of the person's life to collect compensation for their loss. This legal precedent has enabled countless families and relatives to use the tort system to pursue justice for their dead loved ones, and establish a system of compensation due to their pain and suffering and economic losses.

One interesting part of wrongful death law in the United States is that while a person may be prosecuted in the criminal justice system for murder, manslaughter or other criminally negligent homicide, they may still also be taken to civil court by the relatives of the dead person. Although the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution expressly forbids double jeopardy, that is a person cannot be tried for the same crime twice, the accused person can be tried separately under civil and criminal laws.

One important example of this type of case was illustrated during the O.J. Simpson case of the last century. While Mr. Simpson was cleared of any criminal responsibility for the deaths of his ex-wife and another party, a civil suit was brought against him and ultimately won by the families of the victims. While he escaped any jail time as would have been a penalty under the criminal system, Mr. Simpson was found guilty of the wrong deaths of the victims, and a substantial monetary settlement was awarded to their families.

Furthermore, wrongful death claims are usually the only way for families of victims killed by corporations to seek damages and compensation. The nature of the complaint, be it criminal or civil, depends greatly on the nature of the death, how it was caused, and the ultimate responsibility of the entity involved, many people that have had loved ones killed due to defective automobiles, household products, or poorly designed medical devices have a pathway to ultimate vindication and justice for the memory of the ones they lost.




Understanding your rights in a wrongful death lawsuit can help get you through this undoubtedly difficult situation and move forward. Bryan Snyder understands the plight and heartbreak of family members left to deal with the reality of an unexpected loss of a loved one due to another's negligent act. His work as a personal injury attorney in San Diego is to protect the rights of his clients to secure a just verdict in their case, knowing all the while, no amount of settlement or verdict can ever replace the value of a lost family member.

personal loan

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

Crisis and Command with John Yoo

John Yoo is a Professor of Law at the University of California at Berkley and a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. From 2001 to 2003 he served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Council in the Justice Department of President George W. Bush. Professor Yoo is the author of a number of books, most recently of Crisis and Command: A History of Executive Power, From George Washington to George W. Bush.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Deh05-KtKqw&hl=en

adt security

Monday, June 21, 2010

TrafficTickets-Myths.avi

I am a Las Vegas lawyer who fixes Las Vegas Traffic Citations. I work in Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, and Boulder City. This video gives guidance on Las Vegas Traffic Tickets. For further information please go to www.TheSincitylawyer.com or call my office at 1-877-778-0871



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4slH0zzf-0&hl=en

asset finder

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Jamaican Shower Posse, Crips, 5PGz Raided in Toronto (Follow-Up)

Familiar faces appear in gangs sweep Critics claim gangs are unaffected by big busts The 1000 police officers who executed 105 search warrants during the latest gang offensive seized drugs, 10 guns, and arrested more than 70 people — among them some familiar faces. Several young men charged as part of Project Corral are alumni of previous Toronto police gang sweeps, including a purported leader nabbed just three years ago. During the course of the investigation, police identified ------ Twinky ---- — arrested during Project XXX in 2006 — as a source of firearms for two of the three gangs targeted this week: Five Point Generals (5PG) and Falstaff Crips, both based in northwest Toronto. Bail hearings began Wednesday. Acquitted of murder in 2003, Willis was arrested on Feb. 27 in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, along with two other Canadians for his alleged role in a scheme to import 72 kilograms of cocaine into Canada. Described by police as the brains behind the Jamestown Crips, ----, 30, sports two tear drop tattoos under his left eye and the words the world is mine on his upper right arm. This week police laid new charges against him including instruct for a criminal organization and firearms offences. Project Corral is the seventh major street gang crackdown in Canadas largest city in as many years. Critics say the reappearance of some of those arrested in previous investigations underscores a reality: it costs millions and millions of dollars to make mass arrests ...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYYSGB6d2jk&hl=en

axa health care allstate car insurance

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Car Theft Defense Lawyer in Phoenix, Arizona

The Baker Law Firm, LLC www.bakerlaw-az.com Theft crimes are serious charges. At The Baker Law Firm, we understand the fear and anxiety that defendants face when confronting the criminal justice system. Your freedom is at stake and we understand the ramifications of a criminal conviction in today's society. As an experienced theft crimes defense attorney, Mr. Baker is a former public defender who has successfully defended hundreds of clients charged with a variety of theft crimes. He will provide you with an uncompromising criminal defense and protect your constitutional rights, including search and seizure issues, Miranda issues, and evidentiary matters. He has a reputation as a tough criminal defense attorney who holds prosecutors to their burden of proof. For more information about theft crime offenses under Arizona law, the criminal process, or to discuss your criminal charges with an experienced theft crime defense attorney, please call us! The Baker Law Firm, LLC 702 E. Coronado Phoenix, AZ 85006 Phone: 602-889-6901



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxEEa97e36g&hl=en

Avis Car Rental personal injury law

Friday, April 2, 2010

Could Someone Find the Fourth Amendment it Ran Away With a Tennessee DUI and Drug Search

Without getting into lengthy case law discussions, it is safe to say that the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is lost, either it ran away on it's own, or somebody took it, I don't think it ran away. Ok so where did it go, and really what was it anyway? Most people say to me, "they invaded my right to privacy" ok well if we want to be technical about this, some would say a literal interpretation of the Constitution, then there really is no right to privacy, you will not find that in Constititution. It is a right derived from the Fourth Amendment, but not really mentioned.

Ok so the right to privacy is old, right? No, it was born out of a case decided only a few decades ago. We started with a right to privacy, and since that time have continued to erode it. I have said before, it is generally understood that you have a lesser expectation of privacy in your car, so Tennessee DUI, Tennessee Drug searches of your car have less Constitutional protections for you, Why is that? The Supreme Court of the United States has said it is a balancing test between freedom from unreasonable searches, (IE privacy) and public safety. From this the gate swung open the erosion of the Fourth Amendment.

So your driving down I-24 in Tennessee heading to Chattanooga, you are pulled over by a White GMC Blazer type vehicle, and an officer approaches your car, he tells you that you have violated a traffic law in some way, maybe a Tennessee DUI violation or maybe tail light out, but then he asks you, Can I search your car? What does a traffic stop have to do with him searching your car? If your not intoxicated and their is no DUI charge, or you do have a tail light out and agree to ticket, and get it fixed, why should that be a reason to ask to search your car?

The Supreme Court of the United States has said that pre-textual stops are ok, ie if you break a traffic law it is ok for the police to stop you, even though their real intent is to ask you about drugs. Should the police officer inform you that you have the right to say no to the search? If we protect the 5th Amendment with the Miranda warnings, why don't we protect the 4th Amendment with a warning that you have the right to say no?

Few people know that you have a right to say no to the search, but what if you say no? In short it works like this, the clock starts ticking, meaning if you say no, and the police are running your drivers license and writing you out your ticket, they can call for a drug sniffing dog, and if you are stopped by a large White Blazer type vehicle, chances are they have the drug dog in the back of their car, surprise.

Lets say there is no dog with the police when they pull you over, but they call for a drug dog from another officer who must drive to the scene, then the clock is ticking on what a reasonable time is that they can hold you for the traffic ticket they are writing you. If the courts decide it is unreasonable, then any evidence they find is supressed, however if the amount of time they hold you for a speeding ticket is 25 minutes and drug dog arrives, and makes a positivie hit on your car, probably the Tennessee Courts will not supress any evidence that the police find.
So the real question is this, Why should the police be allowed to ask to search your car when they only stop you for a traffic violation or a Tennessee DUI that is unfounded, and have no probable cause to believe that you are doing anything wrong?

If we carried probable cause to the next phase of a traffic stop to protect the Fourth Amendment, what would be wrong with that? To protect the Fourth Amendment like we do the Fifth with Miranda Warnings, all we would have to do is this, if it takes probable cause to believe you broke a traffic violation to pull you over, then why not require that there be probable cause to ask to search your car? It would simply be a two pronge test to protect the Fourth Amendment in regards to traffic stops. Add in a simple reading that you have the right to say no to a search, and the erosion of the Fourth Amendment might slow down.




Posted by Daniel L. McMurtry

http://www.Nashvilledui.info

Nashville DUI Lawyer, Tennessee Criminal Lawyer Daniel L. McMurtry, located in Nashville, Tennessee representing clients in Tennessee on Criminal Matters. Nashville Criminal Lawyer with jury trial experience in Tennessee and Mississippi. Mr. McMurtry can be found at, Nashvilledui.info

alcohol detox alcohol treatment Angeles Drug Los Rehab