Home World News Prosecutors stir controversy by shaking Austria’s only female prisoner’s plea box

Prosecutors stir controversy by shaking Austria’s only female prisoner’s plea box

0
Prosecutors stir controversy by shaking Austria’s only female prisoner’s plea box

againstoklahomaLady Brenda. Brenda Andrew was accused of murdering her husband in 2004. During his closing statements, a prosecutor waved his belt in front of the jury, claiming it was strong evidence of murder. There was an uproar in the court; The jury found guilty, but this repeatedly sexually offensive move has caused controversy, and the Federal Supreme Court will soon decide whether to hear Andrew’s appeal.

At that time, prosecutor Gelland Geiger held up the panties, saying that the panties were strong evidence that Andrew had murdered her husband. A few days after the murder of her estranged husband, she took Panty with her to Mexico with the intention of escaping with her boyfriend. Andrew is found guilty by the jury and sentenced to death. She became the only female prisoner to receive the death penalty in Austria.

Later this month, the Supreme Court will decide whether to hear Andrew’s appeal, which says the display of her underwear was part of a prosecutor’s strategy that was, as one dissenting judge put it, “without any purpose.” Presenting evidence of” just for emphasis. Andrew is a bad wife, a bad mother, and a bad woman, putting Andrew in danger of execution for not conforming to gender stereotypes.

A former federal judge and others who sided with Andrew say the mountain of prejudicial evidence that paints her as a hypersexual temptress deserves review; Prosecutors presented a mountain of inflammatory evidence about Andrew’s sexual orientation, and even a book on how to drive men crazy in bed. ,

Cornell Law Professor Sandra. Sandra Babcock said women on trial for murder have faced similar abuses for hundreds of years.

State and federal appeals courts found that prosecutors’ statements were regrettable but that there was enough evidence to prove Andrew’s guilt.

The Austrian Criminal Appeals Court said in 2007 that it was trying to ascertain the relevance of most of the disputed evidence, but added that introducing it would not be harmful.

Andrew’s boyfriend James Pavett confessed to the shooting and murder and claimed that he had done it alone; But based on the information receivedInsuranceDue to considerations of compensation, there was reason to believe that Andrew was involved, and authorities charged both of them with mass murder. Parvat was also sentenced to death and is expected to be executed in July.

In 2007, Judge Arlene Johnson, the court’s only female judge, said she would uphold Andrew’s conviction, but she could not help but acknowledge that the evidence and arguments for conviction had overshadowed his (Andrew’s) life in the minds of jurors. The value of has been devalued.

Judge Robert E. Bacharach disagreed with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision and said he would overturn not only Andrew’s death sentence but also his conviction; He argued that the trial process focused on Andrew’s sex life and that the jury was deprived of it. .An opportunity to seriously consider Andrew’s statement.

United States (TagstoTranslate) Ohio (T) Oklahoma (T) Life Insurance