The trial of Indianapolis resident Brian Reese has begun in the shooting of IMPD officer Jason Fishburn. Reese fled from police in July 2008 and after running between houses, shot officer Fishburn in the chest and head, injuries that he survived.
http://www.indystar.com/article/20091103/NEWS02/911030385/Brizzi++Fishburn+was+an+ambush+victim
The trial was moved to Porter County, specifically the city of Valparaiso because defense lawyers argued that Reese could not receive a fair trial in Indianapolis due to the exposure and family's reputation in the city. Do you think that it is right that a trial can be removed from the community that the crime occurred in? Should the citizen's of that city / town / community be the one's to decide the fate of an accused suspect, or should the practice of allowing trials to be moved to neutral areas be allowed? (due 11/8)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In think they should hold the trial in the area that the crime occurred in. To me, it doesnt matter where you go for a trial. People will still see you as a bad person for what you did. Jason Fishburn lives near my house, and i have seen his condition. Even thoagh he is recovering, he is still mentally and phisically impared. His scars from that day also remain. This is why i dont think it matters. Brian Reese still comitted an inexplisable crime, and he will most likely get put into jail for a long time if not for the rest of his life because of it.
ReplyDeleteI believe that where the crime is committed, that should be the place where you will be tried. As for this offence, this is a more serious one and may not even matter for him. Whatever he did, or his side of the story, he'll end up getting time in jail with other things on top of that. So to sum this all up, I don't see why they moved it as I'm almost sure it won't affect him, but they should not have in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteI think that they should keep the trail in the community that it occured. I bet no matter who decides his fate he will more than likely end up in jail for a long time. Everyone knows what he did was wrong and I highly doubt that any one is going to be ok with it. Basically, where ever the trail is held he's still going to jail.
ReplyDeleteI agree with John. It doesn't matter where he is tried, he will still go to jail anyway. But this is a serious crime. for smaller crimes, the outcome of the trial will be different if we hold it in a different location. However, for serious crimes, we should judge people in the area they take place because the people who live next to the criminal will have to deal with him later if he gets out.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jessica. The criminal would be put in jail for however long is nessessary, even if the trial is held in another area. It shouldn't matter where they hold the trial. A crime is always a crime, and people will still see it as such.
ReplyDeleteI think that the trial should be held in the city it happened in. No matter where the trial is held he is still going to jail. The crime he committed was terrible and now he will have to pay for that. Anywhere you go, they will know and understand that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Calvin. People will still see you as a bad person anywhere you go. Brian Reese will more than likely go to jail and serve time for what he did.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jessie, wherever his trial is going to be held, no one is going to accept it. Everyone understands what he did was bad and they are going to lock him up for it. In this case the trial being moved doesn't matter because the crime was so bad, but if a smaller case was moved the circumstances might have changed.
ReplyDeleteWith Margaret's point, I think that it really doesn't matter where the trial is being held. The reason though that this is a serious crime is because of him shooting at the officers. This pointing at the suspect, it will not matter where this is being held.
ReplyDeleteCalvin's last point makes sense, but the part that matters is how long he is going to serve. If he were to take this trial in Indianapolis, most likely he would serve life or a number of years. The reason that this article is so important is the fact that it is now in Porter County and the reputation of the officer isn't so big. Thus making the period of his time in a correctional facility less than what he would get here.
ReplyDeleteI think that the trial should be held where the crime took place. Different areas have different laws, and if you choose to commit a crime in a certain area, then the consequences should pertain to the law of that particular place. This is similar to how different countries have different drinking ages. However, I also think that the trial could be moved to more neutral areas, because the people in those areas won't be as biased towards the person who committed the crime.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jonny. The ammount of time the man has to serve in jail is more important than where the trial is. The crime committed and the time spent in jail is way more important.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with everybody else, i think moving the trial is a good thing to do. In the law it states that criminals are intitled to a fair trial. I think holding the trial in the condition where many are still enraged and vengeful would not allow for Mr.Reese an unbias, and legitament sentence. If the trial is taken away from that environment then the case will be prosecuted just like any other, without any personal ties or emotional interest.
ReplyDeleteI think the trial should be moved. I Think everyone is entitled to a fair trial. If that means move it somewhere that the crime didnt take place then fine it should happen. I in no way support the actions of the suspect but, i do believe everyone is entitled to a free trial.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Taylor, I honestly think he is entitled to a fair trial. Everyone when they are born in the United States is entitled to a fair trial. Why should this be different?
I agree with Kylie, It is crucial that every U.S. citizen is entitled to a fair trial. The U.S. has been doing this since the colonies were first declared independant from Great Britain.
I Think the trail should be moved. I belive this because there needs to be a unbias jury so that is insures that the suspect is given a fair trial. This is a law and if you have people that live in that community and those people are friends with the victoms family then you are most likely going to have bias jury memebers deciding the case. This is why i believe that the trail should hbe moved.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with calvin. The law says that a suspect is inosent til proven guiltly. Jason Fishburn with the damage to his brain he cannot rememeber being attcked or even going to work the day he was attcked sou you are relying on other witness that saw the event take place. This i why i disagree with calvin.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daniel that the trail should be moved. I agree with him because he is right about everyone is entitled to a fair trial i also agee with him on I do not support the a the action of the accused but I do believe like daniel said He his entitled to a free trail by law. This is why i agree wtih Daniel
ReplyDeleteI think that it should be held in the criminals hometown, especially if it occured in it like this one did. The people of that community should be able to decide if they want a person like this roaming their streets, in prison, or maybe if its bad enough death. I just think that we still give to many priveliges to people like Brian Reese. They commited the crime like this, they should have to be punished in front of the people they have been around and the people who loved them.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the TRAIL everyone keeps talking about?
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion I think the trail should have stayed in Indianapolis instead of moving it to Porter County. It really doesnt matter what kind of reputation the family has. I dont think that his time in jail or his consequences would have been different in other community. He still committed the same crime that he did before so whats the difference?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Joey.He had a different perspective of looking at this.He said the people of the town should decide what happens to this man. He committed the crime where they live so they should be able to have a say in what happens. Whatever they did shouldnt have been done so they shouldnt have a say where there trail is going to be held.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is perfectly okay for the trial to be moved to an area that is more neutral on the issue. If everyone in one area got to decide the fate of the person who committed the crime, then the trial would not be fair, and it would be completely biased. Yes, the people in the community where the crime occured in can have a say. However, they shouldn't be the only people who take a stand on the issue. The trial wouldn't be fair if this were the case. So, I think it is fine for the trial to be moved.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daniel. Everyone is entitled to a fair trial. Just because the man commited the crime doesn't mean that he shouldn't get a fair trial. This by no means substitutes the actions of Brian Reese, but I do believe that everyone should be given a fair trial.
ReplyDeleteTo some extent I agree with Calvin. Yes, Brian Reese committed an inexcusable crime, but by having the trial in his hometown makes the trial become way more biased and unfair. By moving the trial, it becomes more neutral. However, I agree with the fact that everyone will percieve his actions as wrong no matter where you are.
ReplyDeleteI think they should have moved the trial. If they couldn't have gotten a fair trial in Indianapolis he probably would have been set free. His criminal reputation may have intimidated some. This would have created an unfair trial.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Joey. The trial could not be held in an area where people are intimidated by this criminal and his reputation. It would not be fair for the police officer and his family if this man was unrightfully let go.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dan the trial being moved makes the trial fair. This criminal should not be allowed to have other people influence jury members in the county where the crime took place. People can be swayed easily.
ReplyDeleteI strongly agree with molly. I mean yes inexcusable crimes deserve punishment, however it should still be unbiased. I mean there has been other attacks on officers. It is wrong yes, but it should still be looked upon logically. Reese should be given the right to have this trial in an envirnonment where people are not emotionally attached to this case.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is fine for a trial to be moved from the community in certain cases. In the case of the Fishburn shootings I believe that it is fine because the case has stirred up anger and other bad feelings already toward the defendant. Our rights as citizens say we have the right to a fair trial by jury. If the jury is biased before the trial even starts it is not fair.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Calvin on the bases of the fact that Reese did nearly kill a police officer. This crime is a terrible thing and he deserves to go to prison for it. But again like i said before, our rights as citizens of the United States of America say that everyone has rights to trial by jury. I am not saying I like this system in cases like this but its the way our Judicial system is formatted and we have to go by it. If it were up to most people in Indiana there wouldnt be a trial, Reese would just go to jail but we have to at least give him a chance.
ReplyDeletePlease make sure that each comment made is a separate post. You should have three different posts each week. If you don't, you run the risk of me not seeing that you have multiple assignments included in one.
ReplyDeleteI believe it is acceptable to move a trial away from a certain place. Every person is entitled to a trial by an unbiased jury. In some cases it might not be easy to find unbiased jury members and ensure that they remain that way. It is important and only fair that everybody knows there are no biases nor decisions made before all evidence is presented
ReplyDeleteI agree with Gavin and Calvin. He was accused of a terrible crime. He deserves what is coming to him. It would be very easy for the jury members to make a decision and have an opinion before all evidence is presented. That is the reason he deserves a chance to have a jury that is not surrounded by an area that is sensitive and have a bias towards the subject.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Dan and Corey. It is the best way to ensure a fair trial. Although he committed a terrible crime, he still has the right to a fair trial by a jury of his peers. It is his right to have the trial moved to ensure an unbiased jury. I agree with the decision to move the trial
ReplyDeletei believe that the trial should be held in the city it was committed in. The residents of the town are the only ones who truly understand the impact of this crime. people from other areas will not be able to understand the case as well as a resident.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dan and Corey in that everyone deserves a fair trial. Without the jury having an open mind about the case there is no way the trial could be considered fair. this might make moving the trial acceptable, but i still believe that the case should be heard in the city the crime was committed.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Gavin because this case has hit home and caused bad feelings. I don't believe that he could get a truly fair trial anywhere in Indiana. even though he has committed a crime that should be held in Indiana he would not get a fair trial in the state.
ReplyDeletethe trial should be held in a place where the people of the town werent directly effected by the crime. if you dont do that the trial could be weighted in one way or another wheather for or against the criminal. this could then lead to the case being appealed due to a partial jury.
ReplyDeleteI think that the trial should be held in which the crime was commited in. Fishburn's family has experienced a horrible situation in which they hope that Reese will recieve plenty of punishment for what he has done. If the trial is held in another city in which the crime did not happen in the punishments for Reese could be different than if the trial is held where the crime actually happened.
ReplyDeletei agree with Chris. The residents are the ones who really know by the embact the crime had on their community therefore, I believe the trial should be held in the community where the crime was commited.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jake if you dont know that the trial could be weighed in one way or another wheather for or against the criminal, this could then lead to the case being appealed due to a partial jury. Basically the trial should be held where the crime was committed.
ReplyDelete