For life is an American legal drama television series. It was written and created by Hank Steinberg . The series was released on February 11, 2020 and is now on its second season. It is about a man named Aaron Wallace who was a nightclub owner that was wrongfully accused and framed of being a Drug Kingpin. This series is based on a true story of Isaac Wright jr who while in prison studies the law and fights to get his case overturned. While in prison facing a life sentence for a crime that he did not commit , Aaron Wallace becomes a Lawyer and fights cases for other prisoners. Many of these cases he won and his clients were able to be free. After serving nine years, Wallace was able to prove that within his case there was illegal cover ups, secret deals made with defense attorneys to have witnesses lie under oath and also his star witness was paid to flee the country. Aaron Wallace was exonerated of the charges but because of a prison riot he was apart of he also had three years of probation. While out of prison, Wallace continued his lawyer career.

Based on what I learned about ethics in intro to Paralegal, I watched how the antagonist District attorney Glen Maskin (who was running for State attorney) perform many illegal and unethical moves to keep Aaron Wallace from receiving justice. Maskin orchestrated many misconduct including, abuse of power, perjury and obstruction of justice. Also, Aaron Wallace did a few unethical things to help free his clients, like have his wife write false letters with forged signatures. Also, his wife was a nurse so he would have her look for medical documents which violates HIPPA . He also played dirty so he would also black mail the people with power to get what he wanted.

In the series ,I found it interesting that Wallace was able to receive his law degree while being in prison. I believe in real life that obtaining a degree while in prison is incapable of happening considering one can not take the bar exam if they are a felon. Isaac Wright Jr was actually a paralegal and helped many lawyers win cases for innocent inmates. I do believe that all the corruption displayed in the series could be accurate and happen in the real world because in real life people step on toes to get far in life. Maskin broke the law because he wanted to become the first prosecutor in that state to convict someone under the Drug Kingpin Statue. With that being said , I recommend this series although it is a fiction , a person still gets insight of the things that go on in the court and also behind the scenes.

Title: When They See Us

Author: Ava DuVernay

Released: May 31, 2019

The documentary portrays the events of “five teens from Harlem become trapped in a nightmare when they’re falsely accused of a brutal attack in Central Park. Based on the true story.” The case is legitimate and widely known as the Central Park Jogger Case, 4 out of the 5 teenagers were exonerated after serving some years in prison whereas one teenager out of the five was incarcerated for several years due to being tried as an adult. Having the teenagers tried in a court of law put themselves and their families at risk of never seeing the light of day anymore and the fear of being labelled sex offenders which put a permanent mark on them. Wise (one of the teenagers tried as adult) meets the rapist at isolation facilities who committed the murder, confesses, and came forward giving all the evidence needed to free the teenagers from prison.

The documentary portrayed legal concepts of ethical practice of law. In the second episode of ‘When They See Us’ we are witnessing a trial for three teenagers that are Yusef, Antron, and Raymond. The trial begins with each side explains their case to the jury. The attorneys expressed the defendants by explaining the lack of physical evidence the court has on the boys. The Review Geek states, “the discrepancy of their testimonies and their coercing into false confessions. The state uses the shock factor by showing pictures of the victim and descriptions of her injuries, but are also struggling as the DNA doesn’t match with any of the defendants. However, Linda is determined to get them convicted at any cost.” The plaintiff who is Patricia Meili has no recollection of what happened at the park, she has double vision, she states, and lost her sense of smell. Antron’s father took the stand and explained he was blackmailed because if his son cooperated with what they were asking of him he would be able to go home and that didn’t happen. Also, Antron made a confession on tape and these confessions were shared at court. Korey took the stand and told them he was slapped by the cops and if he admitted to to the crime he’d be allowed to go home, but the Stated disregarded his testimony. The episode ends with the jury saying their verdict and all of them were found guilty.

My reaction to the cultural source made me upset that the criminal justice was corrupt and still corrupt. The legal concepts were portrayed correctly in the sense the teenagers were given trial, evidence was presented, and how the attorneys were able to talk about the defendants to being them justice. Most certainly we can’t deny the boys were not exercised of their fifth amendment rights which is the right to remain silent. A thing to note, the boys were coerced to be giving false confessions which ended them in a hole deeper than they could’ve imagined. In this day and age it is important and vital to fight for rights of black people and people of color because of these cases happen to minorities. This year in May a black man was murdered in cold blood by a white cop, he was saying “I can’t breathe” and this phrase alone made many terrified of how the criminal justice system Is prejudiced. Chauvin is charged with first-degree murder thanks to petitions and social media for bringing this situation to light and bringing justice of George Floyd. The State in the Central Park 5 case were all the white people wringing the defendants and making them guilty because of the color of their skin. All evidence presented was not even theirs. The DNA sample, the hair sample, and the sock and semen. It was all the State doing to make sure they are charged guilty. Minorities deserve better and with Generation Z along the masses on social media, the world is slowly and greatly bringing those justice due to the messed up criminal justice system.

Movie:  Gideon’s Trumpet. Aired on April 30 1980

The movie was based on U.S Supreme Court case Gideon Vs. WainWright. The event occurred in state Florida, during night time it was noticed that a phone booth were broken, and somebody has stolen the money. When the guard asked locals, it was told that an old guy used the booth before the incident. The next day in process of investigation, a lot of coins were found with Mr.Gideon(mentioned old guy), which turned him into the prime suspect. Mr Gideon couldn’t afford a lawyer so he asked for one but it was denied and then he lost the case as jury weren’t pleased with his persuasion. He was sentenced 5 years in state prison without getting fair trial. While he was staying in prison, he started research on his rights that was ensured by The constitution and wrote a ‘writ of certiorari‘ petition to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided to hear his case and provided him an attorney. But under some circumstances Gideon have to go through retrial which he claimed is unconstitutional and fall under double jeopardy.However the judge denied his claim and let the retrial begin where his attorney were able to present evidence on behalf of him. The supreme court  decide unanimously Gideon is not guilty.

Mr.Gideon case was very significant as its brought peoples attention on unfair trial. It was a civil case that later turned into Federal case, it’s not only brought 6th amendment up, it’s also questioned his retrial process what fall under double jeopardy that a person cannot be tried twice for same case, protected by 5th amendment. This scenario made it very clear About U.S justice system that no court has the right to go against of U.S constitution and if they do those trial will get considered as unconstitutional. Therefore if someone feels like their constitutional right was violated during trial they can appeal to the U.S Supreme Court and Court will send their response.

The way the trial went actually interest me on Jurisdiction system, it doesn’t ask you to say what you believe neither what you feel, its rather ask you to prove how your claim is real or why your claim is important. Before watching this movie I didn’t know that you can actually get denied of your constitutional right in under circumstances but it was very overwhelming to see mr. Gideon’s efforts of how he was very determined of his constitutional right. He kept himself very strong to brainstorm so that he can not only save him but will leave a landmark example on American jurisdiction history and these things really attracts people to know about their rights or inspire themself to fight for right and I believe it did accurately represent our justice system because the right protected  by our constitution. I would like to suggest it to others too so its can bring an awareness among others about their right and will inspire them to always look up on constitution if they feel they didn’t get justice.

My Culture Source: Just Mercy

Released on: January 10th 2020

Directed by: Destin Daniel Cretton

The Movie Just Mercy revolves around the real life case of Walter McMillian which took place in 1986. Walter McMillian was arrested and placed on death row for murder of a young girl without proper evidence or conviction. The real reason Walter McMillian was arrested was not because he committed a crime, but because of the color of his skin. Throughout McMillians trial he explains to his new lawyer, that when he was first taken into custody it was clear that the lawyer the state provided, did not do everything in his power to prove McMillians innocence. Throughout the movie it’s clear that the justice system didn’t treat Walter McMillian fairly, they barely treated him as a person. Not only was he treated poorly in the justice system but so was his lawyer, who was also a person of color. When McMillians lawyer would visit him he received degrading comments by the officers. The officers had also made it a point to have him be strip checked, despite lawyers not needing to go through that. Once the council had been made aware that Walter McMillian was wrongfully convicted, they refused to release him from death row. They believed there was no point and that the court had made its decisions and it should stay the way it is to give people peace of mind. It wasn’t until the very end that Walter McMillian was finally released and reunited with his family. I feel like this movie accurately portrayed how our legal system treats black people of color. Although there is a major time gap between the original case and now, there are still the same problems just disguised. Throughout the years more cases have come into light of police arresting citizens for minor crimes or misidentifying them because of the color of their skin.Our judicial system does not properly recognize black people of color and their cases are often brushed off and they do not receive the help that would normally be given to a person of a lighter skin tone.

My source is the film Liar Liar

Written by Paul Guay and Stephen Mazur

Released March 21, 1997

Summary: Liar Liar is about Fletcher Reede, a father and lawyer in LA. Despite having a son and having been divorced, he still prioritizes his career over them. Fletcher lies about the reasons for not being able to be with them in favor of rising in his career. Lying has made him a very successful defense lawyer at his firm. The pursuit of his career over family leads to him missing his sons birthday where his son, Max, wishes that his father would be unable to lie for a whole day which comes true. Fletcher discovers his inability to lie and it slowly but surely jeopardizes his career as he is unable to lie for his defendants in court. In the central case of the movie, his client ,Samantha Cole,  wants a divorce from her wealthy husband and take as much as she can from him. The issue being that Samantha has signed a prenuptial agreement which is what is being contested in court. Normally Fletcher would be able to lie his way around the case and make short work of it but he is unable due to maxes wish. He resorts to only using the truth and facts of the case which results in him finding her documents had been falsified. Fletcher found out Samantha changed documents about her age when signing the prenuptial agreement in order to get married, she had signed it when she was still a minor, which rendered it void and won fletcher the suit without lying. Samantha decides the money was not enough and wants custody of the children as well which the court allowed. Seeing Samantha’s greed made fletcher realize that, that is not who he wants to be in life and argued with the judge to reverse his decision which results in him being in contempt of court and put in jail. Fletcher is bailed out and chases after Max and his ex wife, promising to change. They decided to give him another chance.

How the story portrayed legal concepts

Although it is a comedy, it does portray legal concepts in an accurate way. The court seemingly followed the rules of a real court, all be it with some liberty for the sake of humor. While the over arching theme is toying with the stereotypical idea of a lying lawyer, it does raise the question of ethnicity in doing so. Fletcher was so good at lying, he rarely ever had to look for the truth. So when the time came where only the truth could be the answer, he struggled to find it. The movie also displayed concepts such as perjury which we have not studied at length in class but the movie does display instances of contempt in court, A way a contract can be come void due to age, custody of children and other instances. It also displays the lawyers role in acting in their clients best interest despite it not being what they want to do. Another thing that stands out is the judges authority in court. The lawyers recognize to listen when he commands it which seems very real.

My reaction to the cultural source.

I thought it was a hilarious and brilliant movie. I thought it portrayed the legal field in a hilarious yet accurate way. It was captivating watching what aspects of the law they humorized and how they managed to make it a workable story. I would definitely recommend this movie to others. I think if i was trying to get someone to take an interest in the legal field, this would be one of the movies i would show them because it uses humor to catch your attention while actually presenting law in a rather real way.

My Culture Source: How to get away with murder

Writer: Peter Nowalk

First Aired: September 25, 2014

Summary: This show is about College professor Annalise Keating  who teaches law and she calls the class” How to get away with murder”. In her first class she chooses a group of students to assist her when she has a case at her firm with her employees ( Frank Delfino, Bonnie Winterbottom). The first case she presented to the class was an attempted murder and the defandant was the victims second assistant who was also the victims mistress.The victims wife found out about the affair and the victim moved the mistress to another department to work in and ended the relationship and that’s when she switched the victims blood pressure for asprin which she knew he was allergic too. When he swallowed the pill he fell ill and had a near to death experience. And now they are trying to find out if the mistress actually switched the pill or was it the wife? The case isnt the only intresting thing in the show but its also the things that happens revolving around the case for example in professor Annalise life.

One legal concept that I noticed in the show is that its as if the students where mini paralegals because they were able to do their own research and bring it to their attorney which was the professor one thing that they were not allowed to do is give any legal advice because they did not have a license. Some of the evidence given to the professor was actually helpful to the professor for the case. What adds spice to the show is the cases that Professor Annalise has because majority of her cases are very dangerous and she is a attorney who is willing to do anything too make sure that her clients go free.

I didn’t watch the whole series but one thing that I can say is that it reminded me of why I wanted to be a lawyer because of the investigations and problem solving that needed to be done. Although not everything is accurate in the show but I would refer this show to people that wants to work in the criminal justice field. This show gave me some form of encouragement because I started to question if I wanted to continue in the field of law.

My cultural Source: To Kill a Mockingbird
Author: Harper E Lee
Published: July 11, 1960
Publisher: J.B Lippincott & CO

Summary:

To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper E Lee she tells a story based off of a little girls’ perspectives, who goes by the name of Jean Scout Finch. She explains the things that she has witnessed growing up, as she faces the harsh reality of Alabama in 1933-35. In Maycomb Alabama during the time the book has taken place there has been a fair share of racist individuals living in Alabama. While growing up she has witnessed things that she would not be able to explain, or things that felt wrong but in the eyes of people who was white was something that was considered as right. For example, there was a scene in which she has seen segregation but did not understand why segregation was a thing, and she knew it was something that felt wrong but in the eyes of others was considered as something right. In 1933-35 blacks and whites were segregated, and as a result of that blacks tried to stay out the white man’s way as much as they possibly can. While many black individuals tried their best to stay away many white individuals took that as an advantage, to pin their wrong doings on black individuals being that they know the no one would respect them or care if they did it or not being that if you were black during the time you was automatically guilty. Her father Atticus Finch was a lawyer and he was the 1st white man in Alabama to trial a case where he was defending a black man something in which white individuals do not normally do for the sake of their safety. Atticus was strong for that and regardless of the constant threats to his life, and children he still went on. He tried to set that example for his kids where he made it known it was okay to stand up for things that was felt wrong but to others was considered as right. As a result of that Atticus fought to prove Tom Robinson innocents against the rape and beating of Mayalla Ewells. He was able to provided sufficient evidence in which proved Tom Robinson innocence but being that the jury was racist, and so was the towns people they did not care, and just wanted the black man killed. This book stood out to me because we actually live in a time where people are so willing to ignore the factual evidence that proves something just because they do not like a certain race, gender, etc. It proves the ignorance in people, and shows how the court systems use to be, and how it kind of changed since then.

In the book “To Kill A Mockingbird”, and considering what I have learned in Law1101&1103 I think that in the book To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper E Lee the author accurately portrayed legal concepts. When focusing on Law in the book the author described a criminal issue where they Brough charges on a man for “committing” a crime against a woman. As a result of that they explained how the man accused was brought to jail, had hired an attorney, and would meet with the attorney to talk about the case, and charges in which was brought against him. They show the readers ho the Lawyer Atticus Finch follows the lawyer client privilege, and how Atticus makes sure not to mix his law life with his regular life by not talking much about the case especially in public places. They also give an accurate depiction on the court system, and the court room. Atticus spent majority of his time working like an average lawyer does. In the movie they portray a court room very accurate when it comes down to a judge, a jury, the defendant, and plaintiff. Where the judge insures the law, and makes sure that the law is being followed. The judge also allows certain questions to be asked, and certain things to be said. They allow what evidence can be heard by the courts, and the testimonies that can be heard by the courts. In to Kill a mocking bird they also give a clear and accurate depiction of a jury where they determine the facts, meaning that they hear what both lawyers have to say and based on the evidence, testimony, and questions they determine how the verdict would turn out to be. In this book though we see a verdict in which was completely unfair, and was wrong in so many ways but at the same time was considered as an accurate portray during the segregation period. In this book we see an innocent black man who was failed by the court system which as of today is something in which still happens

When reading To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper E Lee I believe that it is an accurate portrayal of the legal field. Even though we are looking through this case from a Childs perspective we are shown a lawyer who was willing to seek justice for the defendant. We are seen a accurate portrayal of the roles pf a lawyer when it comes down to what a criminal justice does with a client, and with defending the client. I believe that we are given a case in which portrays a criminal issue. I mean even though I do not agree with the ruling or how the case went down. I do believe that the author did a good job at giving a glimpse of what the legal field is like, on civilians, lawyers, jury members, and judges. They bring awareness to how it is also possible and considered as likely for the system to fail rather than seek the justice that it was supposed to seek. I honestly would recommend this book because I feel as if even though it doesn’t not go in to as much detail of what a lawyer does or what they need to do and the jobs of people working in the legal field it provides a vivid understanding on what being in a court room means, and how it is are jobs meaning people working in the legal field to try and eliminate biases , and actually understand the evidence, and testimony, and do not just go off of personal biases and beliefs. Honestly reading this book has all been a one of my many reasons to why I wanted to become a criminal justice lawyer. I feel as if we need more individuals willing to fight for what is right, and are willing to actually seek justice, and use factual evidence to prove innocents and instead of personal beliefs. As of today, there are many innocent individuals who are locked up for a crime in which they did not commit, which relates back to the book of to kill a mockingbird being that we are given a man who was locked up for a crime that he did not do is something in which needs to be addressed. When reading this book and seeing the world as of today we see people who have been locked up for crimes that they haven’t committed for example the Central Park five where there were five innocent black boys convicted of a rape that they did not do it has affected me because it is something in which happens to often.

Cites:

https://www.britannica.com/topic/To-Kill-a-Mockingbird

Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile is a crime non-fiction documentary regarding chronicle/records of the crimes of Theodore Robert Bundy (Ted Bundy) that he did and hid from his longtime girlfriend, who refused to believe after knowing the truth about him for years. A little background information of this documentary-like the main character, who performed Ted Budny’s character etc. Zac Efron was the main character who performed Ted Bundy’s biography that has been launched on Netflix and its worldwide premiere at the Sundance Film Festival on January 26, 2019, and was released in the United States on May 3, 2019. The film received many good reviews and critics at the same time but most people really enjoyed Zack Efron’s performance.    

(Zac Efron as Ted Bundy)

This documentary talks about this introverted, shy, and really public awkward person who was really insecure growing up because of poor family conditions. He used to live in Seattle, Washington, and was a law student and then fell in love with a girl (who was widowed and had a daughter) in a bar where he used to work. His girlfriend (Elizabeth) didn’t even know that he had been murdering other girls. His so-called shyness and pettiness I would say would never make others think that he could do something like this, especially his girlfriend that he loved so much. He killed random young women and even raped most of them and then either burnt their bodies or cut them into pieces. He basically was a psychopath but always pretended that he was innocent and always acted confident after being convicted of murders he did. I want to mention one of his documented victims, Karen Sparks who survived a beating in her own bed with a metal rod that Bundy used to attack her. He had committed crimes in many states including Oregon, Idaho, Utah, Florida, and Colorado. After insulting all the lawyers he got or just dismissing them from his case, he then fought his own case by himself because as I’ve mentioned earlier that he was studying law. He no doubts fought his case really well but all witnesses were against him, everything was proven but he still didn’t confess after proven guilty. He then confessed the murders of 36 women and some studies showed that it was more than 60 women that he brutally killed and got executed after 10 years of being in jail.  His first-ever murder was in Seattle after meeting with his girlfriend. She was the one who suspected his appearance to the police when watched the news about the killer (Bundy). She wasn’t aware that he was the murderer but later on she got to know him being handcuffed in jail via TV and when he came back home, he totally disapproved of the news and said that he was in jail because of a “high-speed felony”. Later on,  things got more serious murdered many girls, and then he shifted to Colorado’s jail and became the most wanted person by the FBI. 

(Wanted sign for Ted Bundy)

“He tried escaping in June 1977” like usual and he did from Colorado’s jail too but he was caught after a week. This documentary definitely portrayed the concept of the court system like first, he went to the trial court for his “allegation”, then intermediate appellate. After being a dangerous murderer then the highest court comes which is the appellate division where he fought his own case, lost it, and went to jail for execution. According to Screen Rant In 1978, Ted Bundy killed six women in Florida and was ultimately convicted and sentenced to death. And one more according to vox.com, “Bundy was charged with raping and murdering two women at the Chi Omega sorority house at Florida State University, attacking two more, and then attacking a young woman nearby after he left”.  Later on, after being sent to jail, he was executed in “Florida State Prison 24, 1989  was buckled with the electric chair and at 7:16 a.m he was pronounced dead”. 

In conclusion, I think yes it really portrayed the legal field because whatever crimes he did at the end he got punished for it and was brutally executed and his body no doubt had felt the same feeling that his victims did. Many innocent women lost their lives because of this psychopath. If I talk about my perspective or interest regarding the law profession, it increased after watching this documentary that yes law works no matter how cool and well you play, if you’ve done something wrong you will get punished at the end no matter what. Court declared his death many times but they could not execute him without him confessing thus waited longer for his confession. And then died at the age of 42. I would like to recommend this documentary to everyone because it’s really interesting and is a biography of Ted Bundy and his crime, there’s actually footage of the courts hearing and like media coverage of his confession and shows what kind of a person he actually was.

 A cultural source that I have chosen is a movie. The movie title is  Jolly LLB 2. It was released on Feb 9, 2017. It was written and directed by Subash Kapoor.

As I summarize this movie.  The movie is about a lawyer who Tricks a video into giving him money so that he can start his own law firm however he is filled with guilt and shame. when he learns that she has committed suicide and that her husband was a victim of injustice. Therefore then the lawyer submits a case about his husband and tries to win the case so that he can get justice for her. Also in the way of getting justice. The lawyer gets a lot of threats because A lot of big people blood involved in this prophecy. The lawyer get shot by some goons. Although he survived and come back again to fight the case. In the end, the lawyer discovered that a police Inspector is involved in this Fake encounter at the end the lawyer discovered that a police inspector is involved in this fake encounter. The inspector released the real culprit and encountered the other innocent boy. After finding out the truth the lawyer wins the case and justice gets served after finding out the truth the lawyer wins the case and justice gets served.

In the civil law and procedure course, we learned about various provisions of law. According to me, I deem that this movie is a great preview of civil and criminal law case. In this case, I saw that how victims suffered till they get justice. Also, I hold that the court system should be fast Because as I saw in the movie and in real-life the court cases took many years. Therefore The cases should be solved first so that the people can move on with their life as they want.  Furthermore, as I saw in the movie that at the end when the witness called in the box. The witness gave the right information to the police however when he gets in the box and just ask him who you are then he said something else. The information that he gave to the police was totally different than the information that he gave to the judge. Therefore I learned That the things say to the police is not advisable in the court. However, somehow the lawyer approved the witness wrong and that’s how he won the case.

My reaction to the cultural source is that this movie portrayed a real sense of civil and criminal cases. I said that because in this movie both civil and criminal things are involved. Like the widow who attempted suicide and her husband who got killed in a fake encounter by an inspector. It has affected my view of law and my interest in the legal profession because these cases happen every day somewhere in the world. Therefore whenever I see something like that it really pushes me to become a good lawyer and help those people as much as I can beyond then I can.