­In 2007 , the U.S. Supreme Court hear 78 cases on issues include terroris­m , waterrights , piece and immigration [ source : On the Docket ] . As the hi­ghest court in the land , it serves as the ultimate decider in vitrine that can alter the practice of law and influence society for generations to come . Take , for instance , Brown v. Board ­of Education of Topeka , the 1954 ruling that struck down the concept of " freestanding but equal " and declare racially segregated public schools unconstitutional . That decision help spark theCivil Rights Movement , which changed the course of American history .

­But landmark court of law decisions such as Brown v. Board are seldom met without debate . People on both sides of the gangway may disagree with a judge or jury ’s ruling , sometimes moil over in violence . Although the fundamental of the American juridic system are centered on the conception of innocent until proven guilty , trial by panel and due cognitive operation , the world may not always believe that those tenet were upheld during trials .

Are there meter when the courts bomb to sincerely resolve a problem ? What bump when these legal structures create more questions than they answer ? To answer that , rent ’s take a spirit at some of the most controversial cases in the chronicle of the United States . Each create some sort of verdict , but the outcomes left many dubious about whether jurist was sincerely met .

Court Case 10: O.J. Simpson Murder Trial

­Ye­ar:1994

commission : slaying of Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman

Plea : Not guilty

­Verdict : Not shamefaced

The execution case of former Heisman Trophy winner and star NFL fullbackO.J. Simpsoncaptivated U.S. audiences for month . It begin with thetelevisedpolice chase of Simpson in a white Ford Bronco through Los Angeles roads on June 17 , 1994 .

Simpson marriedNicole Brownin 1985 , but the brace split in 1992 . On June 11 , 1994 , Simpson and Brown attended their daughter ’s maneuver in Los Angeles and then separate way . Brown went to dinner with friend , and Simpson left to pack for a trajectory to Chicago schedule later that night . The next morning , neighbors establish Nicole Brown and her friendRon Goldmanmurdered outside of Brown ’s Los Angeles condo .

Evidence seemed to point in Simpson ’s direction . For instance , thelimodriver who pick Simpson up to take him to theairportthe Nox of the execution attest that when he get at the house and echo the doorbell , no one answered . While waiting , the driver then meet a prominent grim person in dark apparel enter Simpson ’s business firm . Minutes afterward , Simpson answered the door . bloodline was also find in some of Simpson ’s belongings , include his white Ford Bronco and a pair of air sock .

The trial began on Jan. 24 , 1995 , after Simpson pled not guilty to the two murders . His defense team was led byJohnnie Cochran , who turned the focal point of the test proceedings to supposed racialism of the lead police force detective in the case . Since the jury was majority - black , some felt up that Cochran manipulated the raceway issue as a ploy to gain their sympathy . After more than four months of Margaret Court proceedings , the jury acquitted Simpson ­of both tally of murder .

­In light of the evidence , many questioned the panel ’s decision . And , in the wrongful death civil suit brought by the Brown and Goldman family before long after , Simpson was witness liable .

Court Case 9: Lizzie Borden

Year:1893

care : Murders of her founder and stepmother , Andrew and Abby Borden

Verdict : Not shamefaced

TheLizzie Bordencase has been preserved in the world ’s memory through the pop rhyme :

The murder ofAndrew and Abby Bordenhappened on Aug. 4 , 1892 , in Fall River , Mass. Lizzie Borden , 33 age quondam at the time , was arrested for the slaying free-base on these facts : She was home alone at the clock time of the slaying and there were no mansion of a struggle .

­After the trial began , t­he prosecution presented the ill-famed head of an ax that was thought to be the m­urder weapon . A ally of Borden ’s also show to envision herburna dress after the crime . Borden arrogate she burned the dress because it was covered in blusher .

Nevertheless , the prosecution could n’t conclusively prove that she – and no one else – had killed the parents.­ And despite rumors circulating that Borden had a risky family relationship with her stepmother , witnesses in the trial testified otherwise .

­After the example concluded and Borden was found not guilty , another defendant was never found .

Court Case 8: Sam Sheppard

Year:1954

Charge : slaying of Marilyn Sheppard

Verdict : Guilty , but later assoil

­Rumored to be the basis of thetelevisionshow " The Fugitive,“Sam Sheppard ’s trial for the slaying of his fraught married woman revolve around an unknown murder weapon and interrogative abo­ut a possible trespasser . Marilyn Sheppardwas murdered in her second - story bedroom early on the morning of July 4 , 1954 . Sam had reportedly fallen asleep on a daybed on the first floor and was awakened by his wife ’s screech .

But a tincture of doubt was soon cast over Sam when his account of events seemed somewhat unlikely . He claimed that someone had broken into the house , give-up the ghost up the stairs and snipe Marilyn . He said that he ran upstairs and tried to fight off the " bushy - haired intruder " but was knocked unconscious from behind . After waking up , he fly the coop after the person and tried unsuccessfully to overtake him .

There were no signs of forced entry , and opened drawers and his reverse medical purse seemed too tidy for a random rupture - in . Also , Sheppard ’s testimony was give rather rigidly and officially . Evidence of extramarital social function crest off the pursuance ’s case .

­The panel found Sheppard hangdog of 2nd - level slaying with lifeimprisonment . But because of how much media attention the case appeal , Sheppard was eventually retry in 1966 , where he was acquitted . Interestingly , a civil suit for wrongful imprisonment filed by Sheppard ’s son and tried in 2000 found Sheppard liable .

Court Case 7: Scopes Monkey Trial

­Year­:1925

Charge : Illegal teaching of organic evolution

Verdict : shamefaced

The outcome of theScopes Monkey Trialresonates in U.S. education even today . In 1925 , in Dayton , Tenn. , high schooltime teacherJohn Scopeswent to tourist court for instruct the theory of evolution to his scholarly person . The state ’s organization shun the field of study in school . But compass served as more of a pawn ; the honest purpose of the case was to officially debate theevolutionban in court and to plow the controversy surrounding it .

The pursuance squad wa­s led byWilliam Jennings Bryan , a former presidential nominee and unswerving opponent of evolution . On Scopes ' side , Clarence Darrowaimed to prove that the state proscription was unconstitutional . Bryan and Darrow attracted gang of thousands during the hearings . The testimonies and their statements count the rigor of Darwin ’s possibility versus that of the Bible .

­Ultimately , Darrow , on behalf of the defense , requested that the panel find Scopes shamed so that the case could go on to the commonwealth Supreme Court , where the constitutive ban could be possibly overturned . The panel did so , and the Tennessee Supreme Court eventually dismissed the case .

Court Case 6: John Hinckley Jr.

­Year:1982

Charg­e : set about assassination of President Ronald Reagan

Plea : Insanity

Verdict : Not shamed by reason of insanity

On March 30 , 1981,John Hinckley Jr.opened fervour onPresident Ronald Reaganoutside of the Park Central Hotel in Washington , D.C. One bullet barely missed the president’sheart . Hinckley was wrestled to the ground by Secret Service agents .

But Hinckley was n’t a political vigilante . Rather , he was trying to win the heart of actressJodie Foster , with whom he ’d become obsessed after see the 1976 film " Taxi Driver . "

After displace to New Haven , Conn. , where Foster attend Yale University , leavi­ng multiple letters and speaking with her twice to no avail , Hinckley grew more do-or-die . Hours before the assassination effort , he wrote her a note detail his plot of land to defeat President Reagan to essay himself to her .

Hinckley ’s defense squad set out to demonstrate his insanity , bringing in Hinckley ’s head-shrinker and other mental wellness experts to confirm schizophrenia . The prosecution , however , impart in their own expert , testifying that he was sane enough to plan and carry out the detailed secret plan .

­The panel ’s verdict of not guilty by understanding of insanity enraged many Americans . An often refer ABC News poll taken the day after the verdict was foretell unwrap that three - quarter of people interviewed disagreed with the panel ’s decision [ source : Finckel ] . Hinckley was then transferred to St. Elizabeth ’s Hospital and in 2003 was allow to have unsupervised visits with his phratry .

Court Case 5: The Lindbergh Baby Kidnapping

­Year:1933

Charge:­Murder of Charles Augustus Lindbergh Jr.

Plea : Not shamefaced

­Verdict : Guilty

When the infant son of renowned aviatorCharles Lindberghwas kidnapped from his crib around 9 p.m. on March 3 , 1932 , people across the land took bill . A ransom money note for $ 50,000 was left in baby Charles ' nursery , and a crushed ravel was found outside of the window .

Because of the extensive mass medium attention , Lindbergh allow for a mediator , Dr. John Condon , to negotiate with the kidnapper . After a series of five note , Condon met with the kidnapper and have him $ 50,000 for data . Condon was told that the baby could be found on a gravy boat off the New York harbor . But an extensive search revealed neither the boat nor baby Charles .

Then , on May 12 , the infant ’s body was accidentally discovered in woods near the Lindbergh home . As the search for the snatcher carry on , it focus on tracking any ransommoneythat had been spend . Investigators describe it toBruno Richard Hauptmann , who was cop after authorities find thousands more at his star sign .

­A jury establish Hauptmann guilty on Feb. 13 , 1933 . In nastiness of offers to commute his conviction and pecuniary help for his married woman and son , Hauptmann never confessed and waselectrocutedon April 3 , 1936 .

Court Case 4: Leo Frank

­Year:1913

Charg­e : Murder of Mary Phagan

­Set against the southerly backdrop of Marietta , Ga. ,Leo Frank , a Jewish human being , was impeach of murderingMary Phagan , a young white woman who worked with him in a pencil factory . The prosecution ’s arguments hinged on the testimonial of a sinister janitor at the mill namedJames Conley . Conley said that Frank had killed Phagan and say Conley to incline of the body . He also said that Frank had planted notes by the body blaming a shameful person for the offence .

Crowds inside of the courtrooms continually lunge Jewish insults during the proceedings , underlining the hate that resonated during that era . The white supremacist group the Klu Klux Klan even formed theKnights of Mary Phaganin re­sponse .

Despite forensic evidence channelize to Frank ’s innocence , he was nonetheless convict todeath by hanging . As a result of the rickety grounds , the regulator of Georgia commuted the judgment of conviction to life incarceration . later on , an furious mob kidnapped Frank from gaol with slight resistance and killed him by lynching .

In 1986 , the Georgia State Board of Paroles excuse Frank .

Court Case 3: Alger Hiss

Year:1949

Charge : Perjury

Conviction : Guilty

­TheAlger Hissperjury display case launched the career of then - congressmanRichard Nixon , the head of theHouse Un - American Activities Committee­ ( HUAC)that investigated potentialCommunistinfiltration in the government .

Hiss work for the State Department and was accused by former CommunistWhitaker Chambersof being a Soviet broker . On Aug. 5 , 1948 , Hiss adamantly denied the charge before HUAC .

After Hiss filed a slander suit against Chambe­rs , Chambers bring out a packet of typewritten and handwritten annotation allegedly from Hiss , and later , strips of 35 - millimeter cinema of State written document allegedly pack by Hiss . These were splendidly referred to as the " pumpkin papers " because Chambers had kept them in a hollow out - out pumpkin . As a termination , Hiss was charge with perjury , or lying to the homage while under oath .

­Hiss later admitted to publish the handwritten notes , but the source of the celluloid and the typewritten letters remained disputatious . After one jury could not come to a finding of fact agreement , a 2nd event was get on that finally line up Hiss hangdog and condemn him to five years in­prison . Hiss maintained his purity until his death .

Court Case 2: The Scottsboro Boys Trial

Year : 1931

Charge : violation and rape

supplication : Not hangdog

Verdict : Guilty

­TheScottsboro Boys Trialrepresents one of Amer­ican history ’s darkest chapter . Nine young disgraceful men ranging in ages from 13 to 20 age previous were arrested on March 25 , 1931 , for assault charges result from a fight that broke out on a freight train in Paint Rock , Ala. Two ashen cleaning lady on the train –Victoria PriceandRuby Bates(who later confessed that she lied ) – also claimed Brassica napus by the group of men .

Once the boys were taken into police force hold in Scottsboro , Ala. , the white community rioted outside of the poky , calling for punishment . Within five day , on March 30 , the boys were indict by a grand panel . By April 9 , all but the youngest of the group had been sentenced to death by all - bloodless juries .

The case locomote to the Alabama Supreme Court in 1932 , which continue the previous convictions . Then , the U.S. Supreme Court heard the vitrine , ruling that the defendants ' rights had not been upheld , which direct the case back for retrial .

­After three trial run and six year inprison , the heraldic bearing were dropped for four of the boys : ­Willie Roberson , Olen Montgomery , Eugene Williams and Roy Wright . The other five – Charles Weems , Ozie Powell , Clarence Norris , Andy Wright and Haywood Patterson – stay in prison and were eventually released on parole old age by and by .

Court Case 1: JFK Assassination

­Year:1963

citizenry involved : Lee Harvey Oswald andJack Ruby

Charges : Assassination of JFK ( Oswald ) ; murder of Oswald ( Ruby )

­Verdict : shamefaced , later countermand ( Ruby )

Most agree that the tribulation and investigations surrounding the assassination ofPresident John F. Kennedyin Dallas , Texas , are the most controversial in American history . The chairwoman was hit three time on Nov. 22 , 1963 .

Lee Harvey Oswaldwas arrested for the blackwash after investigators discover a rifle hidden between two boxes with Oswald’sfingerprintson them , along with empty cartridge in the Texas Book Depository . Two days afterward , Jack Rubyshot and vote out Oswald .

On March 14 , 1964 , Ruby was sentenced to death byelectricchair for Oswald ’s murder . But the Texas Supreme Court overturn the opinion on the basis that the case ’s publicity close up Ruby ’s right wing to a bonnie hearing . Before he could be tried a 2d sentence , Ruby died from genus Cancer in 1967 .

Despite the work of the Warren Commission and the House Select Committee on Assassinations task with enquire the assassination , no conclusions to the reasons and people behind it have ever been found . It is surmise that Oswald acted as part of aconspiracy , and his relationship with Ruby also remains in question .

For more articles about controversial reprehensible cases , go to the link on the next pageboy .

Lots More Information

Sources

­