Assignment on Theory of the Crown’s case

Here is the theory of crown case has been mentioned here in which it has been stated by Mr. O’Brian who was an assailed officer and has been involved in the procedure of performing his responsibilities as a peace officer and this post has been given by the arresting officer Mr. Forebrain, as well as by pulling Officer Fantasia along with the officer fantasia which has ben available in jaw. The main aim behind this theory is that some of the officers believed that  fantasia has been taken as to be rotten an officer who had the responsibility of policing along with the quality of having membership in Coalition which has been known as the legislation group which performs his duty as a citizen and the one who is associated with police. The theory of crown which has been read by Mr. Brian and it has been heard by all the officers which has been presented in the place at that time. he nevertheless mugged Officer Fantasia because of his belief that the later on he was “rotten”.

So that it has ben mentioned that crown believe that defendants must be imprisoned for the crime of defendants which will cause harm to the body.

Strengths and weaknesses of Crown’s theory

The potentials of crow n theory as been mentioned here

·         The circumstance that Mr. O’Brian has been mentioned to the officer of fantasia of Mr. Friedbrain ad after that smash him into the jaw which had not been unclear.

·         As well as Mr. O’Brian has been associated with the company who thinks that some of the nasty officers had been done their duty to police and develop the appropriate aim regarding to their responsibilities.

·         As well as another officer holds the vast criminal record for the defendants of disobeying and deceitfulness. As well as their evidence will not move the officers against the police officer who was performing his responsibilities as a peace officer at that time.

There are some of the weakness of theories has been mentioned here

·         It is conceivable that Mr. O’Brian could not hear that the other officer mention himself as a peace officer before he saying it

·         There is also a circumstance has been mentioned which is related with the legislation agency that police the police did not needed the mean that a set promoted to accomplish the goals by disparate the leagal meanings

·         As well as the officer fantasia cannot be seen and did not be able to mentioned his own self after the primary shove by Mr. O’Brian.

·         defendants must be imprisoned for the crime of defendants which will cause harm to the body.

Theory of the Defense’s case

In the theory of defense which is the case of Mr. O’Brian in tis it has been mentioned that ay kind of excellent Samaritan which will have been completed when he observed that there was another person had been presented which has been taken as attacked. Moreover, it has also been said that Mr. O’Brian has pushed the officer fantasia and officer Mr. Friedbrain and it has been mentioned that he did this because the officer fantasia going to beat the Mr. Friedbrain who was lied on ground. Moreover, the theory of defense which has bee taken by Mr. Fantasia does not mentioned and take him as the peace officer more important then Mr. O’Brian who was beaten and had injury on his jaw and then the officer fantasia mentioned himself as he did not hear Mr. O’Brian properly and clearly. As well as it has also ben stated that a punch has been made by on the jaw of Mr. O’Brian and according to the theory of defense Mr. O’Brian so not make is self- defense against the punch and it has been reached to the pocket of Mr. O’Brian who thinks that it is the weapon which harms bodily. In conclusion, the wounds constant by Officer Fantasia seemed to have been slight and thus incapable to encounter the edge of bodily damage.

Strengths and weaknesses of Defense’s theory

The strengths of Defense theory as bene given below:

·         Mr. O’Brian does not recognize Mr. Friedbrain, though removing any reason of objection which has been aroused by supporting the end;

·         Officer Fantasia dressed up in a way that he has been seem as “a drug user”;

·         The proceedings have been conveyed rapidity in that evening that’s why Mr. O’Brian could not have the advantage of retrospection and credibly proverb what he thought to be happening;

·         Mr. O’Brian do not resist detention from the costumed officer who came into the scenario after a while when the incident was happen.

There are some of the weakness has been mentioned here

·         Mr. O’Brian has been belonged to legislation group and was earlier pronounced his aversion for “nasty police”;

·         Mr. O’Brian explained his memory as “dappled”;

·         Mr. O’Brian’s fiancé did not query to state by the protection rather than seemingly hold appreciated exculpatory suggestion.

 Verdicts:
Guilty or not guilty on the first count, common assault

In tis it has been mentioned that court identifies the suspect not guilty on the charge of defendant which was led the victim toward body harm. The Suspect made a captivating case that he had been behaved as a good Samaritan and must have enough money protection under s. 27 of the Illegal Code.

moreover, it has also been stated that the suspect mentioned that the punch unnerved was made by him in self-defense because he gets frighten form the Officer Fantasia who was coming toward his pocket to have a weapon. After this Court receives this dispute and rejects the Crown’s fight that his defense did not hold any kind of reality and that the Suspect were put himself in impairment’s way. Practically, every excellent Samaritan will put him or herself into destruction’s way to help others. The right of self-defense has clearly not been taken away from good Samaritans.

Guilty or not guilty on the second count, assault, police

According to the findings of court it has been mentioned that suspects not guilty on the charge of defendant who was the peace officer and has been busy in the implementation of his responsibility.

As well as the Crown did not illustrate the level of inevitability which has been made and heard by defendant and it has been identified by the officer Fantasia. So, the findings of court which has been compete for crown they he would not be discharged as in the regard of is responsibility to prove that the Men’s Rea of the Suspect elsewhere a judicious distrust.

Your reasons for judgment:
a)      For the Crown Witness,
           i.          What evidence did you accept? Why?

Officer Fantasia was into the execution process of his duties as the officer of peace to arrest Mr. Friedbrain and the court did accept it. He is the witness of the officer Fantasia that the he was pushed by Mr. Friedbrain by his hands first, that led to his choice to get down as well as arrest Mr. Friedbrain. Although, Mr Friedbrain did also maintain the he did not make any kind of connection with Officer Fantasia. Mr. Friedbrain was also resenting the business at that time when Mr. Friendbrain was begun confronted as well as assaulting by Officer Factasia. During his testimony, Mr. Friedbrain did distplay the provided intensive animosity as well as the criminal history and the system of court. It is because the court also give priority and importance in the testimony of Mr. Friedbrain. The court also accepted that a badge is not shown by Officer Fantasia to Mr. OBrian as the latter was approaching the altercation’s scene. In an undercover capacity, Mr. Friedbrain along with Officer Fantasia were the both in the altercation.

The court is also accepting that officer Fantacia had attempted but he had to face failure to determine himself to Mr Obrian among the landing letter his first shove that take away from office fantasia from Mr firedbrain as well as attack on his jaw. The defence disputed such incomplete attempt of the identification.

Furthermore, the court has also accepted that to reach for the badge, officer attempting when Mr OBrian struck him. But the reality is a little bit different that officer fantasia will be trying to find out himself as well as attempting to reach the badge which is the reasonable action by him according the situation.

At last, the court did accept this thing that Officer fantasia did go to attempt for his identification as the peace officer to landing Mr. OBrian the first contact. The Suspected attested that he hear the voice of Officer Fantasia while saying “fuck off” when the latter heard the Suspected approaching. At this time, the court did conclude according to the facts as well as based on the logics that the officer should attempt to reach for his identification without saying only “fuck off”.

         ii.          What evidence did you reject? Why?

The court has rejected the testimony which is offered by the officer even though suspected person would have assumed his identity by using the format in the takedown. Thus, the techniques which are considerable in the law of enforcement world, this court may not rationally expect the suspect and accused for the familiarity with these techniques and the approaches. Furthermore, to examine what kind of techniques were being the used, the accused did not have any kind of advantage of perception or the opportunity. So that’s why, the court has any reasonable and logical doubt the accused that he did hear the identification of the officer.

The Court may have some kind of problems to accept Officer Fantasia’s that the first hint of his information that it might possible that his senses were strong that time and assessed Mr. O’Brian had entered as well as he did not see Mr. O’Brian until he come closer to officer. The evidence of Officer Fantasia was clear and providing the information that Mr. O’Brian did enter from behind him and then he did go to the right. It is very difficult for him to identify any other person or very difficult to see another person as the officer Fantasia did arrest Mr friedbrian. But it is not the knock on the authority of officer. Furthermore, memories about the details of whole scenario can be inaccurate because the passage of time because the jobs of the officers are very crucial. It is because they have deal with the other kind cases on the daily basis. So, the inaccuracy in the memory might also be possible. In the last, the court has also found out and concluded that the officer was aware of Mr. Obrian’s presence because of the latte yelled “get off” as he did approach the scene.

                                            i.          What evidence did you accept from Defence Witness 1? Why?

The Court has also accepted that the Accused had yelled “get off” to the Officer as he was going to approach the two persons. Officer Fantasia appeared that he had not seen Mr. O’Brian was approaching but he was not able to “sense” any other person that time because he also did accept the ground and Mr. friendbrain also did resist in that situation. Because of this reason, it was very difficult for to focus on other thing. Moreoer, Officer Fantasia also said that Mr. OBrian came from behind or entered from behind and then go to the right. Although, the court did consider this thing. In the last, he might have see the suspected person coming from behind without shouting to grabbing his attention toward him.

                                            i.          What evidence did you accept from Defence Witness 2? Why?

The court is also accepting the testimony of Mr. Friedbrain that he did not ever hear about the officer’s identification to the Mr. Obrian. When the accused person is not the trustworthy witness as well as the accused displayed the specific level of the animosity to the officer as well as showed the disappointment toward the system then I accepted the position of Mr Friendbrain on the ground and give the tough time to officer by resisting. At that time, it was very hard to focus on other things. So, that’s why the officer did identify himself and this act will be reasonable. This court has accepted the testimonies quite frankly, it should not matter whether Mr Friedbrain heard the identification attempt of the officer.

Mr. OBrian who was accused in the court trial, was returning to his house from a movie along with his fiancé when they saw the office on top of Mr. Friedbrain to hit him. At the time, the suspected person ran to the altercation supposedly shouting “get off” towards the officer Fantasia. The court assumes that the words by the accused person was heard by officer Fantasia based on evidence of officer Fantasia and he had no any other way to see the Mr. OBrian entering form the behind at the time of altercation with Mr. Friedbrain. The twist in this case was that officer Fantasia did identified himself a peace officer to Mr. OBrian. If it is ture then why Mr. OBrian heard him and blind wilfully to that scene. After that the crown submits that the identification of officer Fantasia had been heard by Mr. OBrian but continued to attack on the officer according his belief when he was like a “rotten officer”.

3        What evidence did you reject from Defence Witness 2? Why?

The court disapproves Mr. Friedbrain testimony that he had not he did not engage in a fight first with Officer Fantasia and Officer Fantasia was the one who pushed him first. The task that the Officer Fantasia was given that evening required him to be careful and not make a move that will make his cover blown and compromised the mission. Given the Mr. Friedbrain track record and lack of proper reason, the Court finds that Officer Fantasia was performing his duty and during that was attacked for no reason. Officer Fantasia was performing his duties and during that the mishaps took place that made the situation worse.

            2. Facts of the case:

Officer Fantasia was performing his duties on or about June 12, 2009 as an undercover Officer to uncover a drug dealing that in park that was highly suspected for trafficking by drug dealers. For the safety of Officer Fantasia, one officer was appointed as a backup. Around 2330, Officer Fantasia saw an inmate in the park during his parole. Analysing the situation Officer Fantasia thought that his cover may be blown and approached Mr. Friedbrain to leave the area. However, the situation did not go as planned and Mr. Friedbrain resisted and situation got worse. It is still not clear that who made contact first between the two. However, Due to the trustworthiness of Mr. Friedbrain the court accepts the evidence presented by Officer Fantasia and finds that Officer Fantasia was performing his duties and it was within legal grounds.

Furthermore, the crown presented the evidence that the accused belonged to the group of advocacies that polices the police. The defense disputed this evidence. Although, this courts is giving more importance on the membership of the accused as well as do not consider the said membership as establishing the motive for the attack. It is due to the related individual or person to the advocacy group that does not have a mean to attain their goals and objective by spreading violence.

The defense also submits that the officer did not recognize the himself to Mr. OBrian before the first push. Furthermore, Mr. OBrian had not heard about any identification whether office Fantasia did identify himself as the peace officer. As described the pace of the altercation, the reality is that the park was the dangerous area. Furthermore, on the reality of this case, the officer was also dressed and he was fit for that operation, as well as officer fantasia was also faced the accused person all those times. So, the court has accepted that it might possible that the accused person was not able to hear the officer fantasia’s identification. Due to this reason, its duty had not discharged by the crown to prove the offense out there the possible doubt.