South Africa Essays (926 words) - South Africa, Africa, Xhosa People

South Africa South Africa is a place of hurt, heart, and change. Over the years, South Africa has either been through rough times in the traditional tribal part, or being descriminated because of their color of skin. South Africa has two major tribal groups; The Nguni/South Ndebele, and the khoi/San. The South Ndebele, together with the Zulu, Xhosa and Swazi, belong to the South Nguni ethnic group. In the case of the South African Ndebele group, the area is the Southern part of South Africa. Here, they have lived, worked on farms, and hunted for generations. They are a very communal tribe. They work together, share together, help each other out, and hunt with each other. This group is very dependent on all of their family. On the other hand the Khoi/San group is the complete opposite of the Nguni/South Ndebele. They live in the Kalahari Desert, they are Nomadic, and rely on livestalk to live. They might be more Independent then the Nguni, but they still get alittle help from their families too. Like they go hunting together. Unlike the Nguni the Khoi/San use poisoned arrows to kill their livestalk.Little did these groups know what they were going to be going through the next 300 years; colonialism. In 1652 South Africa was forever changed when Dutch established a rest stop in South Africa.Apartheid also unofficially started. At that time, the area was occupied by the Khoi/San clans. The pressure on the Khoi/San increased as more Dutch and French settlers arrived. By the 18th century, most Khoi/San had lost their land to these European settlers. Cape Town became a major port as a way station for the Europeans. The colonists were mostly farmers and cattle herders. They became known as the Boers. They developed their own culture and language (Afrikaans). In the 1770's, the Boers encountered the Bantu, who were migrating. The Nguni Bantu clans settled between the Drakensberg Mountains and the sea. The Sotho clans settled in the interior, north of the Cape Colony. The 19th century competition for land led to the conflict between the Bantu clans, which led to the boer war, 1899-1902. Hundreds and thousands died during the wars, entire clans disappeared and it resulted in the creation of many Bantu nations. Now they are unable to communicate with each other, and now they don't have any power to stop the Europeans. British forces twice occupied the Cape region, in 1795 and 1806. In 1814, toward the end of the Napoleonic Wars, Great Britain purchased the Cape Colony from the Dutch for 6 million Britidh pounds. After 1820 thousands of British colonists arrived in South Africa, and they demanded that English law be imposed. English became the official language in 1822. The Khoi/San were given protection, and slavery was abolished in 1833. When the Dutch, or the Afrikanns found out that slavery was ebolished they got angry, because they thoght that the Bilble said that black people were supposed to be slaves, which then created the Boer war. It is now 1948, the Europeans have now taken over South Africa. Four Years earlier a man named Nelson Mandela became a lawyer, and joined the A.N.C. so he could help the salvaging African people. Even though he played a very important roll in Apartheid, colonialism, and their human rights, that still didn't stop the Europeans from torturing them for the next 46 years. Nelson Mandela was a nice man, but in 1956 Mandela went on trial for treason, but was acquitted in 1961. During this time he married Nkosikazi Nomzamo Madikizela. He was again arrested in August of 1962, he was sentenced to five years in prison. While in prison, Mandela, along with several others, was convicted of sabotage and treason and in June 1964 was sentenced to life imprisonment. During this period Mandela became a worldwide symbol of resistance to white domination in South Africa. In prison he acted nice to everybody. When an Officer told him to do something, he politely answered Yes sir, but he did this for a reason. He did that so the officers could feal the guilt for what they have been doing to all the black people. The goverment soon got pressured by the people to let

Trials and Verdicts

Trials and Verdicts The important result of the legal decision-making process is the verdict which can end the trial process and state the form of punishment for the convicted person.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Trials and Verdicts specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More However, to understand the details related to interpreting the cases and law and to stating the verdict, it is necessary to analyze the processes related to different courts according to their jurisdiction, and to focus on the real-life examples in order to discuss the problems of accepting a plea bargain and of being wrongly accused. The question of the court’s jurisdiction is discussed when it is necessary to select which court can decide on the certain case appropriately. Following the Felkner v. Jackson case, it is possible to state that different courts are effective to discuss concrete issues and decide on the aspects of the case, but the process of t he case resolution can be rather long and complicated. In 2011, Steven Frank Jackson was convicted of many sexual offenses. However, Jackson referred to the Batson v. Kentucky case, and focused on the issue of racism in relation to the California jury who discussed the case. Jackson’s petition was accepted and examined by the California Court of Appeal, and then the California Supreme Court decided according to the court’s jurisdiction to reject the necessity of the case’s review (Felkner v. Jackson, 2011). Nevertheless, the case was not unresolved even in relation to the Federal District Court. In this situation, the Supreme Court took the jurisdiction to provide the decision, and the previous courts’ decisions were defined as unreasonable. Finally, it is stated by the Supreme Court of the United States that the petition â€Å"for certiorari and the motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis are granted. The judgment of the Court of Appeals for the N inth Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion† (Felkner v. Jackson, 2011). As a result, it is possible to note that the decision to discuss the case in the Supreme Court of the United States is appropriate because of the necessity to resolve all the controversial points of the case which cannot be resolved in the other courts.Advertising Looking for research paper on constitutional law? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The cases when the defendant accepts a plea bargain as an alternative to trial are also very controversial and complicated because this decision can be associated with a kind of pressure from attorneys and prosecutors. Furthermore, the defendant can change his or her decision during the process. Thus, to discuss the question in detail, it is necessary to focus on the Freeman v. United States case (2011). William Freeman was convicted of dif ferent crimes associated with drug trafficking and drug delivery. However, Freeman decided to develop the plea agreement under Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C). The agreement meant that Freeman could plead guilty depending on receiving a specific sentence. The case was rather complicated, and it was decided in 2011 that referring to 18 U.S.C.  § 3582(c)(2), the sentence could be reduced â€Å"for the offense to which the defendant pled guilty† (Freeman v. United States, 2011). In spite of the fact that the plea agreement does not mean the alternative to the trial, the case is important to be discussed to decide whether or not justice was served. Referring to this concrete case, it is possible to state that the justice was served because the severity of crimes should be taken into account every time when the possibility of the plea agreement is discussed. The most problematic cases are those ones in which defendants are wrongly accused and later vindicated. One of the most famou s cases is the case associated with the famous sportsman Brian Banks who was convicted of raping Wanetta Gibson. Brian Banks accepted a plea bargain because of the threat to be imprisoned for more than 40 years. However, in 2011, it became possible to state that Banks was not guilty, and he was vindicated. The most important aspect to be discussed in relation to the case is the fact that Wanetta Gibson lied during the first trial process in order to receive the significant financial compensation (Powers, 2012). The decision of the court could be different, but the lawyers failed to prove or not Gibson’s words. That is why, these details affected the whole trail process, and Brian Banks had to accept the plea agreement in order to avoid being imprisoned for a long period of time.Advertising We will write a custom research paper sample on Trials and Verdicts specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In spite of the fact, the United State s’ legislative system should contribute to the people’s welfare and protection, there are many controversial verdicts and trials which can influence the statement of the principles of justice in the country. From this point, it is necessary to pay much attention to the controversial aspects and issues discussed during the trial processes in order to resolve cases in the appropriate courts with the focus on their jurisdiction and to avoid the ineffective decisions which can lead to the unalterable consequences. As a result, all the details of the case should be taken into consideration to decide on the person’s guilt and possible verdict. References Felkner v. Jackson. (2011). Retrieved from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/10-797.pdf Freeman v. United States. (2011). Retrieved from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-10245.pdf Powers, A. (2012). A 10-year nightmare over rape conviction is over. Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/local/l a-xpm-2012-may-25-la-me-rape-dismiss-20120525-story.html