Page 51 - JulAug2019_BarJournal

STUDENT ESSAY FEATURE

There are also aspects of the Evans case that But he was held responsible for leading a group white jury of seven women and five men. When
suggest the validity of a not guilty verdict. First, of mostly troubled teens and young adults to Evans’ counsel requested a retrieval due to a non-
during the shootout there was an eyewitness who murder.” How can you convict someone of diverse jury, the motion was dismissed. Later, it
stated that Evans repeatedly tried to bring the murder if you cannot prove beyond a reasonable was also revealed that some jurors joked about
shootout to a halt by surrendering, but could not doubt that they shot anyone? During the murder Evans’ guilt, but the motion was still dismissed.
reach police. By making this statement, he was trial, the defense also argued that the violence “In the aftermath, he faced charges of seven
suggesting that it was the police who wanted the was not planned, but spontaneous, and that at counts of first degree murder, two for each of the
shootout to continue, and not Evans. Next, it is least officers were under the influence of alcohol. three policeman killed and one for the civilian
worth repeating that there is still no clear evidence An autopsy provided proof that the officer was who died.” How can one person be charged on
as to who fired the first shots. One of the New intoxicated at the time of the shooting. seven counts for three murders, when it was
Libya activists testified that the meeting Evans Despite the conflicting evidence in the not proven that they even fired a gun? Due to
called that day was not about arming themselves Glenville shootout, the fact that Evans’ 6th this evidence Evans should be found not guilty:
to attack police, but a black history topic, and Amendment rights were violated means that he the jury was all-white during a time when racial
that no weapons were involved in that meeting. should have been found not guilty. Throughout tensions were high, his right to an attorney was
This challenges the previous statement that the the process, Evans’ 6th Amendment rights were not granted, and he didn’t receive a fair trial.
purpose of the meeting was to arm themselves violated. Evans repeatedly asked for an attorney,
1 http://images.ulib.csuohio.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/
against the police. Furthermore, every witness but the officers continued to interrogate him general/id/6349/rec/17, page 18.
that was called to the testify as to the time when without an attorney present. His lawyer filed 2 https://www.pbs.org/hueypnewton/people/people_hoover.html
Evans became armed and his intentions behind a motion for the trial to be held in a different 3 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/complicated-history-
when he became armed, stated that they did not location due to the publicity and racial issues 1968-glenville-shootout-180969734/
identify Evans as the person who shot first, nor during that time. His attorneys argued that Evans 4 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/complicated-history-
did they support the argument that Evans had could not receive a fair trial. The biggest issue 1968-glenville-shootout-180969734/
even shot anyone that evening. In his 2010 thesis with the trial was that Evans’ 6th Amendment 5 http://images.ulib.csuohio.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/
general/id/6349/rec/17, page 20.
from Cleveland State University, Michael Zadell rights were violated when he was not judged by a
6 https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/complicated-history-
wrote, “He was never accused of firing one shot. jury of his peers. Evans was convicted by an all- 1968-glenville-shootout-180969734/

meadenmooore.com

 Forensic accounting
 Economic damages
 Expert witness testimony
 Business valuation
 Bankruptcy services
 eDiscovery
 Insurance loss measurement and defense
 Alternative dispute resolution
 Mediation of damages
 Subrogation
 Fraud investigation

JULY/AUGUST 2019 CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN BAR JOURNAL | 51