Defense Anaylisis

One of the best rights granted to the individuals in America is the privilege to be viewed as honest until demonstrated blameworthy in the court of law. It is the job of the prosecutor to demonstrate to the on lookers, to the jury, and to the court that the blamed is liable for a wrongdoing. In the event that the prosecutor has a substantial case, the blamed, either on his or her own or joined by an experienced lawyer, can display different defenses to contend why they acted in the manner in which they did. Schmalleger (2010, p. 114) states, “A defense consists of evidence and arguments offered by a defendant and his or her attorney(s) to show why that person should not be held liable for a criminal charge”.  

In the framework of the Criminal Justice System there are a numerous number of reasons that one may use in an effort to legitimize a criminal offense that has been carried out and there are times when criminal safeguards or defenses are utilized but denied and the criminal offender or guilty party is sentenced to the charges that they were hoping to have dismissed or retired because of the criminal defense that was utilized in defending the case.

Whether it is securing our property, belongings, family or even ourselves, it is human instinct to protect what is our own.  How far is an individual willing to go to ensure their possessions?  Often circumstances may cause a situation to get out of control or out of hand, and the individuals involved must make decisions that could change their lives and the lives of everyone around them.  A few people will go beyond the use of a sensible defense and resort to the intent to kill as in the case of the State v. Norman.  In the case of the State v. Norman
324 N.C. 253, 378 S.E.2d 8 (1989), Mrs. Judy-Ann Norman, the Defendant, was found guilty of voluntary manslaughter for the murder of her husband Mr. J. T. Norman.

 Mr. Norman and the Defendant had been married for a quarter of a century and it was alleged that Mr. Norman had been beating the Defendant since approximately five years after they were married.  Mr. Norman was said to have often made the Defendant prostitute her body in order to financially support the family as well as other degrading things like sleeping on the floor. On June 12, 1985, Mrs. Norman, the Defendant shot her husband three times in the head while he was sleeping.  The Defendant claimed that she was suffering from “battered wife syndrome” and that the shooting was in self-defense.  The Supreme Court found that it was not necessary for the Defendant to kill her husband due to the following facts: