Son Of Sam And Dred Scott Cases Essay, Research Paper

The Son of Sam trial occurred in New York, New

York on May 8, 1978. David R. Berkowitz was the

Defendant, he was on trial because he was a mass

killer. He killed six and wounded seven from

October 1976 to August 1978. Hundreds of Detectives

were assigned to find the .44-caliber killer, so

called because of the unusually large hand gun

bullets he used. They found him because he got a

parking ticket in front of a fire hydrant near the

seen of the crime. Cops found his car and found a

duffel bag full of guns behind the front seat. He

was seized when he came outside, carrying a

.44-caliber revolver in a small paper bag. He was

found guilty and got six twenty-five years to life

terms with an additional fifteen to twenty-five

terms for assault and attempted murder.

One of the reasons for these outrageous acts

were because his stepmother, whom he was attracted

to, died. He was extremely depressed for a long

time. As a result of his stepmothers death he went

out to search for his birth mother. He found her,

but was disappointed with her physical appearance,

so he decided to take it out on the entire female

race.

The second reason for David Berkowitz actions

was because his dog ordered him to. Berkowitz

claimed that his neighbor, Sam Carr, was a high

demon and sent evil messages through his pet

Labrador. These messages ordered him to kill.

Berkowitz says he tried to kill the dog, but he

couldn t. He claims the dog was possessed.

From this court case a law was produced. This

law clearly states that every person or

organization contracting with any person accused or

convicted of a crime, with respect to the

reenactment of such a crime, by way of a movie,

book, magazine article, radio or television

presentation or from the expression of such

person s thoughts, opinions, feelings or emotions

about such a crime, shall pay over all profits to

the Crime Victims Board.

The Dred Scott Case

Dred Scott was born a slave. He lived in

Missouri with his owner Peter Blow, where he had no

freedoms. Next he was sold to a doctor in Illinois.

After this Doctor died he was sold to this family,

who lived in a free state . But this family was

different they wanted to free him and help end

slavery. Yet they wouldn t release him. They wanted

him to take this to the lower courts. One of the

lower courts actually ruled in his favor, but the

Missouri State Supreme Court later reversed this

decision. After eleven years in the court they

finally got it to the U.S. Supreme Court. The

Justice Roger Taney s reason for this ruling was

that slaves were not citizens, and just because

Scott lived in a free state didn t mean he was

free . The significance of this case is that Dred

Scott Decision actually ended the Missouri

Compromise.

Scott s clam was that he had become a free man

when his owner had taken him to a free state, which

had made him free under the 1820 Missouri

Compromise. It was decided he was a slave

regardless were his owner took him, during the 1856

December term.