Court Records
https://forums.court-records.net/

Steven Truscott case
https://forums.court-records.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=3683		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Alexandros [ Wed Sep 12, 2007 9:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Steven Truscott case
Yes, the title misleads but I'm planning a Steven Truscott case meets Phoenix Wright. And with that I need some help with some of the characters.
For those unfamiliar with the case of Truscott, in 1959 he was 14 and accused of raping and murdering his 12 yr old friend Lynne Harper. The trial had conflicting testimonies, children as witnesses, and some falsified evidence. Even with this faulty trial they still found him guilty. Without even finding decisive evidence or even a motive! But 3 years ago, they have admitted the mistake of the "miscarriage of justice" and acquitted Truscott.
What's this have to do with Phoenix Wright? Well I need some characters to represent the people in the past. The defense? Phoenix :phoenix: . The prosecution? Manfred Von Karma :karma: and of course the judge will be... :udgy: . And the Detective who ignored crucial evidence and lead suspects? Why none other than :gant:. He'll be Detective Graham. The guy who immediatly suspected Truscott and did everything to prove his (non existant) guilt.
So far the characters are:
Defense: :phoenix:
Prosecution: :karma:
Judge: :udgy:
Detective Graham: :damon:
Coroner Pennister: :grey:
Farmer Lawson: :yogi: or :shelly:
Jocelyn: :april:
Um... Can anyone else help me with this who has a rather copious amount of knowledge of this case?
Author:  major_pw_fan [ Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Steven Truscott case
how do you know the evidence was falsefied i admit getting children to testify is prob not the best idea .The fact they didnt even find a motive seem reason enough not to have him found guilty
Author:  Alexandros [ Mon Sep 17, 2007 8:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Steven Truscott case
How do I know there was falsified evidence?
Easy.
There were three doctors. Two said that were lesions on Steven's p***s, suggesting that Steven had indeed, raped Lynne Harper. But the third doctor had testified that Steven had no such injuries. That leads me to my other point. In order to be convicted properly he would have needed the three crucial pieces. The Means, the Motive and the Oppurtunity. In order for Steven to have indeed raped Lynne, he would have needed both Means and Oppurtunity. In the trial the Means clearly contradicted the Oppurtunity and vice versa. Also they could not link a motive to the 14 yr old. Even one of the witnesses (Jocelyn) went to Farmer Lawson, another witness and requested that he commit perjury because she had made an error during her testimony! Also the military and the police both denied anything involving Alexander Kalichuk in the case that they (Detecitve Graham) had convicted and arrested an innocent child, letting the culprit off scot free. Also anyone on the case that believed in Truscott's innocence was taken off the case. Apparently Graham did not want anyone, thinking Steven was innocent, on his force because it could turn evern stickier than it turned out to be. Even awhile back (when he resurfaced) some evidence that was to be presented to the court was destroyed, perhaps because it proved Truscott to be innocent.
Any other questions?
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/