Who is Joel Rifkin?

Joel Rifkin is a convicted serial killer to whom 9 murders were attributed over the course of his murderous spree, which lasted for approximately 4 years; due to the nature of his crimes – in addition to the number of his victims – many consider Joel Rifkin to be amongst the most prolific and dangerous serial killers to exist within the State of New York.

Joel Rifkin Profile

The following outlines the crimes of Joel Rifkin

Date of Birth: Joel Rifkin was born on January 20th, 1959

Residence: East Meadow, New York

Year of First Killing: 1989; Joel Rifkin was convicted of murder a prostitute and disposing of her remains in the East River in Manhattan, New York

Year of Apprehension: 1993; Joel Rifkin was apprehended on the Southern State Parkway, which is a highway on Long Island, New York – upon investigation, the apprehending officers discovered the remains of a prostitute that he had murdered in the trunk of his car

Notable Details and Personal Information: The following personal details have been considered to be contributory to the behavior and criminal actions undertaken by Joel Rifkin; in addition, these case details were made mention within Joel Rifkin’s criminal trial:

Joel Rifkin was adopted by 2 parents; in 1987, Joel Rifkin’s father took his own life – in his trial, this fact was considered to be a catalyst for Joel Rifkin’s violent tendencies and emotional disorder

Joel Rifkin was reported to suffer from dyslexia, resulting in his possession of a 128 IQ score; these factors were considered to contribute to his difficulty in school as a child

Locations of the Murders: Joel Rifkin’s murders took place within the State of New York; oftentimes, Joel Rifkin would solicit prostitutes in Manhattan, New York and dispose of their bodies in the surrounding areas of New York and Connecticut

Victims:  Joel Rifkin was charged for the murder of 9 victims; however, he has been linked to as many as 17 victims

Status as a Serial Killer: Joel Rifkin is classified as a serial killer due to the fact that Joel Rifkin was convicted of the murder of 3 or more individuals within the duration of a single month

Nature of Victims: Joel Rifkin’s victims were classified as female prostitutes; many of whom were reported to be suffering from substance abuse and poverty – many of his victims ranged between the ages of 20 and 30

Punishment and Conviction: In 1994, Joel Rifkin – who was represented by John Lawrence – was convicted of murdering 9 individuals and sentenced to life incarceration within the Attica Correctional Facility in the State of New York; although he is eligible for parole in the year 2197, his sentence is considered to be a ‘natural life’ sentence in prison.

What is the Court Case ‘Marbury v. Madison’?

The court case of Marbury v. Madison is considered to be both the first instance in which the Supreme Court of the United States issued prospective judicial actions requested of it to be unconstitutional, in addition to a facilitator of a definitive outline and mandating of the responsibilities and jurisdiction over which the Supreme Court is allowed to maintain authority. Marbury v. Madison began on February 11th, 1803, whence it was brought to trial; the Supreme Court delivered their ruling on February 24th, 1803.

The Origins of Marbury v. Madison

In the midst of the transition of the appointment of the President of the United States, which occurred as the presidential term of John Adams was nearing; President Elect Thomas Jefferson was appointed as the new President of the United States. Due to the fact Thomas Jefferson and John Adams subscribed to contrasting political ideologies and political thought, John Adams – a Federalist – desired to stymie the jurisdiction of Thomas Jefferson’s presidency. Although Thomas Jefferson was not defined as an Anti-Federalist, he did not subscribe to the entirety of ideologies and methodologies expressed within the tenets of Federalism.

Notable Figures Participatory in the Marbury v. Madison Case

The following 5 individuals are considered to be the primary politicos within the Marbury v. Madison proceedings:

William Marbury was a Federalist who was appointed to be the Justice of Peace by John Adams prior to the termination of Adams’ presidency; however, Thomas Jefferson – who replaced Adams as President of the United States – failed to acknowledge Marbury’s appointment as a result that it was not finalized prior to the ending of Adams’ presidential term

John Adams, who was the President of the United States prior to Thomas Jefferson, appointed William Marshall as a Justice of the Peace; in an attempt to bolster the presence of Federalists within the Executive Branch of the government – in lieu of his loss in the Presidential campaign – John Adams attempted to fill the Judicial system with as many Federalists as possible

James Madison was Thomas Jefferson’s Secretary of State who was ordered by Jefferson not to finalize the appointment of William Marshall to Justice of the Peace; as a result, Madison was subsequently sued by Marshall thus providing the eponymous name of the now-landmark court case

John Marshall was the first Supreme Court Justice who was responsible for the ruling of Marbury v. Madison; he explained that although William Marshall was owed his respective position as Justice of the Peace, Article III of the United States Constitution prevented the Judicial Branch from forcing another branch of the Federal Government from acting – as a result, Jefferson was constitutionally permitted to deny William Marshall’s appointment

Thomas Jefferson was the President-Elect following the ending of John Adams’ presidential term; in an effort to stifle Adams’ attempt to fill the Judicial Branch with Federalists, Thomas Jefferson cited Article III of the Constitution, claiming that the President of the United States was allowed the implicit agency to revoke mandates not taking place within respective presidential terms

What is McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)?

McCulloch v. Maryland was a Federal court case that took place with regard to foundation of a Federal Bank in conjunction to individual banks mandated by the respective States in which they were located. McCulloch v. Maryland began through a series of events involving the development of legislation prior to its subsequent trial:

(1816) Congress pass an Act that would allow for the formation of Federal Banks permitted to be located within individual states

(1818) The State legislature of Maryland pass and Act in which banks and financial institutions not under the State mandate of Maryland to be subject to taxation

(1819) McCulloch v. Maryland is heard before the Supreme Court of the United States

The Case Profile of McCulloch v. Maryland

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘McCulloch v. Maryland’:

Date of the Trial: 1819

Legal Classification: Administrative Law; this legal field associated with events and circumstances in which the Federal Government of the United States engages its citizens, including the administration of government programs, the creation of agencies, and the establishment of a legal, regulatory federal standard

United States Reports Case Number: 17 U.S. 316

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: 1819

Legal Venue: The Supreme Court of the United States

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice John C. Marshall

Involved Parties: The following are the parties named with regard to their involvement in the McCulloch v. Maryland case:

Andrew McCulloch – named as the defendant in McCulloch v. Maryland –  was the appointed manager of the Federal Bank stationed in Baltimore, Maryland; in spite of the statute calling for the taxation of banks not considered to be chartered by the State of Maryland, McCulloch refused to submit tax payments

The State of Maryland – named as the plaintiff in McCulloch v. Maryland – defended that it was owed taxation as a result of the Act passed in 1818

Verdict Delivered: A verdict was passed in favor of Andrew McCulloch

Associated Legislation with regard to McCulloch v. Maryland: The following statutory regulations were employed with regard to the McCulloch v. Maryland trial:

The Necessary and Proper Clause present within the Constitution of the United States stated that the Federal Government was permitted to operated Federal Banks within individual States with the intent of both formulating and executing legislation deemed necessary for the administration of legislature; furthermore, this clause allowed for such actions to take place without punitive recourse in the form of taxation

Subsequent Cases Associated with McCulloch v. Maryland: The following legal cases and trials made mention and reference to the findings undertaken in McCulloch v. Maryland:

D’Emden v. Pedder was a case that took place in Australia in 1904, which cited the findings of McCulloch v. Maryland; this case involved the ability to tax the employment receipts of governmental employees by individual, non-governmental legislation – the judgment of this case ruled that individual legislature would not be permitted to tax governmental bodies

What was the OJ Simpson Trial?

The OJ Simpson Trial was a criminal trial that occurred in 1994; both the hearing – as well as the deliberation of the OJ Simpson Trial lasted for upwards of 8 months. The OJ Simpson Trial is not only considered to be amongst the most prolific, but also the longest within the history of the United States. The OJ Simpson Trial involved murder suspect and former professional football player Orenthal James “OJ” Simpson, who was accused of fatally stabbing both his former wife, as well as her male friend:

On June 13th, 1994, both victims were found outside of Simpson’s former wife’s home in Brentwood, California; the bodies were discovered at approximately midnight

Prior to his arrest, OJ Simpson led the California Highway Patrol on a vehicular pursuit and chase on a California highway; law enforcement gave chase to Simpson until he had agree to surrender in front of his home

The OJ Simpson Trial was televised; as a result, the case circumstances received a multitude of public and media attention

The Case Profile of OJ Simpson Trial

The following is a case profile of both the crimes of OJ Simpson, as well as OJ Simpson Trial:

Date of Birth: OJ Simpson was born on July 9th, 1947 in San Francisco, California

Residence: At the time of the murders, OJ Simpson lived in Los Angeles, California

Date of the Crime: June 13th, 1994

Charges: 1st Degree Murder; classified murder committed in a premeditated, purposeful, illegal, and deliberate fashion

Legal Classification: Due to the fact that OJ Simpson was acquitted of his criminal charges, the victims’ families brought Civil charges against Simpson:

Criminal Law; this legal field is defined as the analysis, regulation, and oversight of crimes committed against what is perceived to the ‘General Public’; in contrast to Civil Law, in which crimes are considered to be non-violent and specific to their targeted victim, Criminal cases typically include criminal activity presumed to compromise the safety of the public and public authority

Date of the OJ Simpson Trial: January 29th, 1995 to October 3rd, 1995

Legal Venue:  The California Superior Court:

The defense team was comprised of attorneys F. Lee Bailey, Robert Shapiro, Alan Dershowitz, and Robert Kardashian, Gerald Uelmen, E.G. Marshall, Carl E. Douglas, and Johnnie Cochran

The prosecution team was comprised of attorneys Marcia Clark, Christopher Darden, Gil Garcetti, Hank Goldberg, and William Hodgman

Victims:  OJ Simpson was accused of the murder of 2 individuals:

Nicole Brown Simpson (35); former wife of OJ Simpson

Ronald Goldman (25); friend of Nicole Brown Simpson

Verdict of the OJ Simpson Trial: OJ Simpson was found to be innocent on all criminal charges of the murders of Ronald Goldman and Nicole Brown Simpson; many individuals believe that the prosecution mishandled the case details, which were presumed to be latent with evidence implicating Simpson – however, subsequent to his Civil trial, OJ Simpson was found guilty and forced to pay monetary restitution to the families

What is Plessy v. Ferguson (1896)?

Plessy v. Ferguson was a court case that took place within the State of Louisiana with regard to the investigation and analysis of racial discrimination suffered by African Americans; this racial discrimination was considered to be prominent within the Southern States. Homer Plessy, who was considered to be 7/8th’s of Caucasian descent, boarded a railroad car operated by the State of Louisiana; due to applicable legislation enacted with regard to races permitted on individual railroad cars, Plessy was requested to vacate what was considered to be a ‘Whites Only’ car – upon his refusal, he was subsequently arrested:

(1890) The State of Louisiana passes the Louisiana Railway Car Act; a law requiring the distinction and operation of separate railway cars for both African Americans and Caucasians

The Case Profile of Plessy v. Ferguson

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘Plessy v. Ferguson’:

Date of the Trial: 1896

Legal Classification: Civil Law; Civil Law is a legal field in that typically addresses nonviolent circumstances and events that are perceived as presumable wrongs suffered – Civil Law  cases this judicial review within Civil Law is typically reliant upon legal statutes in lieu of past court cases, decisions, or preexisting findings

United States Reports Case Number: 163 U.S. 537

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: May 18th, 1896

Legal Venue: The Supreme Court of the United States

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Justice Henry Billings Brown

Involved Parties: The following are the parties named with regard to their involvement in the Plessy v. Ferguson case:

Homer Plessy – named as the plaintiff – accused Louisiana State Legislature as violating the terms of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States, which expressed the requirement for equality amongst all citizens of the United States; he perceived his removal from the rail road car to be in direct violation of equal rights

John Howard Ferguson – named as the defendant – was an attorney and legislative representative operating in Louisiana; he was responsible for the passing of the Louisiana Railway Car Act

Verdict Delivered: 7 out of the 8 Supreme Court Justices ruled in favor of the defendant, John Howard Ferguson; John Marshall Harlan was the only Justice to present an opposing ruling

Associated Legislation with regard to Plessy v. Ferguson: The following statutory regulations were employed with regard to the Plessy v. Ferguson trial:

The 13th Amendment to the United States Constitution abolished slavery, declaring forced servitude and disenfranchisement to be illegal

The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution required that citizens of the United States be entitled to equal rights

Subsequent Cases Associated with Plessy v. Ferguson: The following legal cases and trials made mention and reference to the findings undertaken in Plessy v. Ferguson:

The ideology of  ‘Separate but Equal’ was made famous as a result of this case; the findings stated that the Louisiana Railway Car Act did not deny the African American population of Louisiana equal rights – in contrast, this ruling alleged that the rights were mandated on an equal basis within required segregation

Who was Pretty Boy Floyd?

Charles Arthur Floyd, known by his nickname ‘Pretty Boy Floyd’ was an individual who both masterminded and engaged in a various string of bank robberies between 1929 and his death in 1934. Pretty Boy Floyd was first arrested in 1929 for alleged vagrancy and robbery; however, Pretty Boy Floyd was only incarcerated for a number of his days prior to his release – subsequent to his release, Pretty Boy Floyd ensured that he would never again be subject to incarceration. Within his string of criminal activities, Pretty Boy Floyd was accused of crimes including robbery, as well as murder; however, the sole murder for which Pretty Boy Floyd was charged was for the killing of an Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) Agent on July 22nd, 1931:

During his crime spree, Pretty Boy Floyd was accused of the robbery of a multitude of banks; he was reported to have stolen thousands of dollars

Pretty Boy Floyd were amongst the main suspects with regard to the ‘Kansas City Massacre’, which is classified as a gunfight taking place between the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) and Pretty Boy Floyd’s gang; 4 FBI Agents were reported as being killed in this firefight on June 17th, 1933 – however, Pretty Boy Floyd was never convicted for any of the murders

The Case Profile of Pretty Boy Floyd

The following is a case profile of both the crimes of Pretty Boy Floyd, as well as a legal classification of statutory legislation associated with the case:

Date of Birth: Pretty Boy Floyd was born on February 3rd, 1904 in Adairsville, Georgia; he was killed on October 22nd, 1934 in East Liverpool, Ohio – he was 30 years old

Residence: Pretty Boy Floyd frequently changed residences with regard to his criminal activity and fugitive status; he typically resided within the area of Missouri

Dates of Crime: 1929 to 1934

Criminal Charges: Robbery, Resisting Arrest, and Murder

Notable Details and Personal Information: The following personal details have been considered to be contributory to the behavior and criminal actions undertaken by Pretty Boy Floyd; in addition, these case details were made mention within Pretty Boy Floyd’s criminal trial:

Pretty Boy Floyd has been reported as possessing and adamant hatred for the banking system and financial organizations; with regard to certain accounts, Pretty Boy Floyd was considered to be lauded by many civilians in accordance with his opposition of the banking industry

The apprehension of Pretty Boy Floyd was considered to be difficult due to the fact that many resident in the surrounding Kansas City provided him with refuge within their homes in order to avoid capture by law enforcement

Upon being pursued by the FBI, a pursuit led by famed FBI Agent Melvin Pervis, Pretty Boy Floyd was shot and killed; however, the implicit details within the death of Pretty Boy Floyd are still debated within modernity

Varying accounts of Floyd’s death suggest that he was shot by Pervis while in custody; however, this is flatly denied by both Pervis and the FBI

What is Roe v. Wade (1973)?

Roe v. Wade is considered to be amongst the most prolific and important cases heard before the Supreme Court. The circumstances and events within the proceedings of Roe v. Wade determined the legality of the abortion process, which is considered to be the medical procedure in which the pregnancy with regard to an unborn fetus is terminated; the plaintiff Jane Roe – which was a pseudonym granted to her in order to allow her to maintain her anonymity – maintained that the laws forbidding abortion instituted in the State of Texas were in direct violation of the 1st, 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th Amendments to the Constitution.

The Case Profile of Roe v. Wade

The following is a case profile of the legal trial eponymously titled ‘Roe v. Wade’:

Date of the Trial: 1973

Legal Classification: Family Law; Family Law provides for the legal review in which applicable legislature and legal procedure with regard to family law takes place; this type of legislation may include any or all legal events, classifications, and legislative statutes identified as a result of the undertakings, as well as the involvement of family members in a familial setting

United States Reports Case Number: 410 U.S. 113

Date of the Delivery of the Verdict: January 22nd, 1973

Legal Venue: The Supreme Court of the United States

Judicial Officer Responsible for Ruling: Chief Justice Warren Burger

Involved Parties: The following are the parties named with regard to their involvement in the Roe v. Wade case:

Jane Roe – a pseudonym given to the plaintiff Norma McCorvey – was a pregnant woman residing in the with State of Texas who desired to terminate her pregnancy and was denied as per Texas abortion laws

Henry Wade – named as the defendant – was a Texas lawmaker who was responsible for the enactment of the legal statutes, which deemed abortions to be illegal within the State of Texas

Verdict Delivered: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Jane Roe; 4 Justices approved of the ruling, 2 Justices simply concurred with the ruling, and 2 Justices opposed the ruling

Associated Legislation with regard to Roe v. Wade: The following statutory regulations were employed with regard to the Roe v. Wade trial:

1st Amendment to the Constitution; this Amendment affords citizens of the United States with the freedom of religion, the freedom of press, the freedom of speech, and the right of assembly

4th Amendment to the Constitution; this Amendment prohibits the unlawful search and seizure of resident belonging to citizens of the United States of America in addition to the provision of  rights of privacy entitled to citizens of the United States

5th Amendment to the Constitution; this Amendment addresses the modern incarnation of the ‘Right to remain silent’, in addition to the prevention of the unlawful and unethical abuse of power undertaken by a governing body

9th Amendment to the Constitution; this Amendment disallows for the violation of civil liberties and unlawful expansion of governmental power

14th Amendment to the Constitution; this Amendment ensures that all citizens of the United States are to be afforded the provision of equal rights and protection

Salem Witch Trials Fact #1: What were the Salem Witch Trials?

The Salem Witch Trials occurred within the New England town of Salem, Massachusetts over a period a year; Salem Witch Trials Facts date these trials to have occurred between February of 1692 and May of 1693. The Salem Witch Trials involved the unlawful and unethical prosecution of individuals accused of participating and engaging in witchcraft; subsequent to the illness suffered by a number of children with the community of Salem, that illness was believed to be a direct result of the practicing of witchcraft; this resulted in the accusation of many individuals with regard to their presumed – albeit unfounded – participation in witchcraft and ‘Dark Arts’. In addition to witchcraft, the notion of the ‘Dark Arts’ is considered to be a catchall term describing any actions or spiritual activity believed to be Satanic – or occult – in nature.

Salem Witch Trials Fact #2: How were the Victims of the Salem Witch Trials Selected?

A vast array of Salem Witch Trials Facts presented by historians suggests that the nature of the selection process within the Salem Witch Trials varied. Initially, the victims were assumed to be viewed as nuisances and outcasts with regard to the community of Salem; however, subsequent to the accusation set forth with regard to certain individuals perceived to be longstanding and contributory members of the Salem community, that theory was soon abolished. In conjunction to the proceedings of the Salem Witch Trials, events that had taken place within the community were perceived to be the direct result of the practice of witchcraft; these included:

The communities supply of rye being subject to corrosion

Reports stating that the accused had appeared in the form of spirits or ghosts before other members of the community

Children of the community acting in presumably strange manners, which included uncontrollable fits and illness

Salem Witch Trials Fact #3: Who were the Victims of the Salem Witch Trials?

Salem Witch Trials Facts set forth by historians list the victims of these illicit proceedings to number a total of 19 individuals who were sentenced to death as a result of their assumed involvement in witchcraft; in addition, the total number of individuals who were wrongfully imprisoned has not been determined. Within the victims of the Salem Witch Trials, Salem Witch Trials Facts express that both men and women were victimized by these trials; some of the victims included:

Tituba; a house worker in the home of Reverend Samuel Parris

Sarah Good; a house worker in the home of Reverend Samuel Parris

Sarah Osborne; a house worker in the home of Reverend Samuel Parris

Rebecca Nurse; a well-respected member of the Salem community

Martha Corey; a well-respected member of the Salem community

Salem Witch Trials Fact #4: What Evidence Was Used to Convict the Accused?

Due to the fact that mass hysteria – in lieu of substantial and founded evidence – was employed by the accusers and legal officials presiding of the Salem Witch Trials, Salem Witch Trials Facts presented by historians suggest that a nature of presumed, unfounded, and spurious evidence titled ‘Spectral Evidence’ was used to provide a nature of proof of the accused participation in witchcraft. Spectral Evidence merely acted as subjected and improvable heresy with regard to any or all presumed participation.

What were the Salem Witch Trials?

The Salem Witch Trials were a series of ongoing criminal trials and investigations that took place between the months of February of 1662 and May of 1663 in Salem, Massachusetts – a small Massachusetts town in New England. Within the proceedings of the Salem Witch Trials, a total of 19 men and women were sentenced to death for their alleged participation in witchcraft and the ‘dark arts’; the dark arts were considered to be activity that was both occult and Satanic in nature. In modernity, historians cite the Salem Witch Trials as amongst the most corrupt and unethical legal proceedings to have taken place within the boundaries of the United States; however, at the time of the Salem Witch Trials, the concept of the United States had not yet been developed – the area now considered to be the United States was merely referred to as ‘The British Colonies’.

What is Spectral Evidence?

With regard to the Salem Witch Trials, spectral evidence is regarded as presumed and alleged evidence citing the presence of spirits considered to be notorious, evil, and harmful in nature; due to the implicit difficulty in facilitating tangible evidence of one’s involvement within such activities, the notion of spectral evidence became a standard legal instrument in conjunction with determining an individual’s association with witchcraft and the dark arts. Although the use of spectral evidence was widely used within the Salem Witch Trials, certain reverends residing in Salem had adamantly disputed the substantiality of the use of evidence spectral in nature:

Reverend Cotton Mather, who was a primary opposing force of the use of spectral evidence urged the court system of Salem to abstain from admitting such evidence into their respective trials; this was due to the fact that spectral evidence was considered to be both subjective and unfounded in nature

In addition, a variety of advocates for the victims convicted of witchcraft in the Salem Witch Trials maintained that the use of spectral evidence could substantiate proof for any event or circumstance in lieu of the presentation of concrete and tangible evidence

The Victims Salem Witch Trials

Prior to the cessation of the Salem Witch Trials in May of 1664, a number of individuals had been incarcerated due to their respective – albeit assumed – participation in witchcraft; furthermore, 19 individuals had been killed as a result of capital punishment upon their respective conviction of witchcraft. The victims of the Salem Witch Trials were primarily assumed to be chosen as a result of their view in the eyes of the community of Salem:

The initial victims, such as house workers named Tituba, Sarah Good, and Sarah Osborne were presumably accused as a result of their presumed – and unfounded – roles as heretics within the community of Salem

Eventual victims of the Salem Witch Trials, Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey, were considered to be longstanding, well-respected members of the community; as a result, theories began to form with regard to a conspiratorial nature of the convictions with the intent of repossessing land, property, and possessions

Who is Sirhan Sirhan?

Sirhan Sirhan, born Sirhan Bishara Sirhan, is a Palestinian-born individual who was convicted of the murder of Robert F. Kennedy – a Senator of the State of Massachusetts. Sirhan Sirhan was 23 years of age when he assassinated Robert F. Kennedy in the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, California; Kennedy was shot after he had completed a speech given to supporters – Sirhan Sirhan shot Kennedy 4 times, 3 of the bullets hit Kennedey directly, while the fourth punctured Kennedy’s suit jacket. In addition, 5 individuals were injured by shots fired by Sirhan Sirhan; subsequent to the shooting, Sirhan Sirhan was subdued and arrested:

Sirhan Sirhan was born in Palestine, but had emigrated to the United States with his family; they had resided both in New York and California

Sirhan Sirhan’s defense team attempted to enter an insanity plea with regard to the motives of the assassination, but upon discovery of journals kept by Sirhan Sirhan, the presiding Justice deemed Sirhan Sirhan to be of sound mind

The Case Profile of Sirhan Sirhan

The following is a case profile of both the crimes of Sirhan Sirhan, as well as a legal classification of statutory legislation associated with the case:

Date of Birth: Sirhan Sirhan was born on March 19th, 1944

Residence: At the time of the murder, Sirhan Sirhan lived in Arcadia, California

Date of the Crime: June 4th, 1968

Criminal Charges: Assasination; 1st degree murder of a public official, as well as the attempted 2nd Degree murders of 5 other individuals – although the killing took place with malice of forethought, deliberation, and planning, the injured victims were not presumed to be intended targets

Legal Classification: Criminal Law; this legal field is defined as the analysis, regulation, and oversight of crimes committed against what is perceived to the ‘General Public’ – in addition, this case retained themes of Administrative Law resulting from Robert Kennedy’s position as a United States Senator

Date of the Trial: February 10th, 1969 to April 17th, 1969

Legal Venue: The Superior Court of the State of California

Victims:  Sirhan Sirhan was charged for the murder of Robert F. Kennedy

Associated Legislation and Statues with regard to the Sirhan Sirhan Case: The following statutory regulations were employed with regard to the Sirhan Sirhan trial:

Sirhan Sirhan was assumed to have assassinated Robert Kennedy as a direct result of Kennedy’s support for the State of Israel during the Six Day War; this war was fought between Israel and Jordan, Syria, and Egypt – as a Palestinian citizen, Sirhan Sirhan opposed the support expressed for the State of Israel

Verdict Delivered: On April 17th, 1969, Sirhan Sirhan was found guilty of the murder of Robert F. Kennedy

Punishment and Conviction: Sirhan Sirhan was sentenced to execution; he was sentenced to be executed by gas chamber. Although sentenced to death, Sirhan Sirhan is currently 66 years of age and incarcerated in Pleasant Valley State Prison in Coalinga, California; he has applied for parole a number of times and has been summarily denied – his most recent parole denial took place on March 2nd, 2011