Group 3 (Lauren Brendel on the Zapata Case)

Body not needed for conviction (Ed Treleven, Wisconsin State Journal)

The jury last week was unable to reach a verdict for Eugene Zapata. He was accused of killing his wife 30 years ago, but there are no traces of her body. Dane County prosecutors are undecided as to retry after having the latest mistrial.In the past when it comes to bodyless murder cases, 1989 Homberg from Stoughton was charged with the murder or his wife after just 5 hours of jury deliberation. Also,2001 Dan Kutz was accused of murder of his wife with no body as evidence. All the cases in the Dane County area were the killing of wives in difficult marriages. Debora Denno has found that these types of cases are not always marriages. For example the Manson case, in which a ranch hand was killed. The court said "the government need only prove a crime has been committed." The main problem with bodyless cases is that the jury has to come to a total agreement and in the Zapata case there were 10 guilty, 1 not guilty and 1 undecided.

In these types of cases its very hard to know exactly who killed the missing person. Its more likely when there are divorces or promotions and so on involved but how do you really know how the person was killed and by whom. It's sad that all the court needs it to prove it yet, how can you prove someone is even dead without seeing the body? It's also surprising that there are even six cases that were bodyless murder convitions in Wisconsin. I think that the court should be able to convict these people on these three facts. First, If the missing person was a spouse and there was a divorce. Second, if the missing person didnt take any belongings with them and absolutely no one has heard from them. And third, if there are people that can testify that the person on trial and the missing person had a terrible relationship and that he/she had a reason for killing the missing person. In conclusion it's possible but I think its very hard to convict a murderer if you don't have the body.

Group 2 (Krista Lefflin on Hurrican Katrina)

The article Hurricane Katrina Exacts another Toll: Enduring Depression from the Washington post, discusses the aftermaths of hurricane Katrina that continue to happen today. Hurricane Katrina was one of the largest hurricanes to hit the United States, it completely destroyed New Orleans. It has now been more than two years since the hurricane hit and New Orleans continues to be severely damaged. People are frustrated that the cleanup is taking so long and the long recovery period is taking a toll on the mental state of the residents in New Orleans. A survey taken of the Gulf Coast’s mental health shows that even though the levels of depression and other mental illnesses doubled after Katrina, those levels continue to increase two years after the hurricane hit.
Hurricane Katrina caused a variety of problems: many people lost their jobs, their homes, their friends and their family. Psychiatrists are trying to show these people that they are not crazy and are trying to help them in any way they can. Residents of New Orleans are still living in trailers, on deserted streets with a lot of damage to them. Because of these poor conditions, people have become a lot more depressed and they feel helpless. The only thing that will help is if the efforts to clean up the damage from hurricane Katrina get better, and if those people can get back to a stable life.
I think it is ridiculous that the conditions are still this bad in New Orleans. I can understand why people are having depression issues because it seems hopeless that conditions are going to get better. It has been two years since the hurricane and people continue to live in trailer homes that are dirty and unsafe. Relief efforts need to increase so these people can go back to having a stable life. If our government would step it up and help these people, they could lead normal lives again and their mental health could return to normal.

Group 1 (Lesley Hacker on Stem Cell Research)

Stem Cell Bank Picks up Lines

David Wahlberg from the Wisconsin State Journal has a very informative outlook on stem cell research. The National Stem Cell Bank is housed at the WiCell Research Institute and is affiliated with UW-Madison. This is the country's only official repository of the cells and contains government-sanctioned human embryonic stem cells. Wicell grows and studies these cells and then sends them around the world for research and in hope for cures. Wicell received 16 million dollars over four years from the National Institute of Health to run tests and store 21-stem cell lines. Each stem cell line contains fifteen vials, each which are composed of three million cells. These cells are extremely fragile and are very vulnerable when they are being thawed out.

This is a very slow process due to the competitive nature of science and politics. There are rules such as receiving federal funding only if cells used were created before August 9, 2001. Also, as politics and leaders begin to change, views and regulations will change as well.

This is a very controversial issue because many believe that its wrong to destroy these embryos because they are human life. Others believe that this is the gate-way to finding cures to diseases such as diabetes and Parkinson's. Stem cell research has a very unclear future and only time will tell. What do you think will happen with this process?

Group 4 (Olivia Zabel on Russian "productivity")

William Saletan's article F--- Off: Skip Work and Make Love for Your Country (Slate, September 13, 2007) discusses a strange issue of orders given by a Russian governor. A governor in Russia actually gave orders to employers to allow a day off from work in order for the employees to have sex. Although this may seem like a joke, the reasoning behind this was actually to increase the population of the country after a "radical decline" due to AIDS, drug abuse, and other population killers. Cash awards were said to be issued to couples who could give birth exacty nine months after the day that employees were alotted to have sex, and believe it or not, a main doctor said that due to a similar deal that
happened the prior year, "women delivered three times the usual number of babies on payoff day." A rebuttal to this story is that having women try for this prized day of birth will only cause women to induce labor which could possibly lead to premature birth. Would women really threaten the lives of their children for a cash prize, or would they pass up the chance to have a healthy baby? Also, could this concept be reversed to decrease the population? In countries where there are way too many people, could a government issue cash prizes to couples who refrained from having more children, and would the population follow through? Maybe not--sometimes human nature is hard to resist.

Group 5 (Carmen Coats on the Zapata Trial)

Mistrial Declared in Zapata Trial

Jurors had heard testimony and circumstantial evidence. The jurors went into deliberation Friday and continued for 30 hours, but could not agree upon a verdict. The vote was 10-1-1. The majority of the vote was for guilty, but there was one juror who was undecided, and another who would remain with his innocent vote because of a lack of evidence. The jurors were deadlocked. On Monday afternoon Judge Fiedler declared it a mistrial. Now prosecutors are deciding whether or not they should have a re-trial, Linda Zapata says she'll be ready to testify against her father if there is one.


I think that the case needs to be re-tried because I think that a new jury will find him guilty. Hopefully in the new trial they will have some physical evidence to back up the case because I think that it will definitely affect the outcome of the trial.

Group 2 (Jimmy Luccas on O. J. Simpson)

In the article Simpson Arrested on Charges Related to Robbery, Noah Adams and Ina Jaffe talk about another one of OJ Simpson’s problem s with the law. On September 16, 2007 OJ Simpson was arrested for reportedly being a part of an armed group that broke into a Las Vegas hotel. Simpson is facing seven charges, six of which are felonies. He was accused of stealing some memorabilia that documented his career in sports, while being armed with “deadly weapons.” OJ Simpson is a retired NFL star running back that became famous for more than just his football career. OJ Simpson was accused for killing his wife and her friend. This incident was made public very quickly. The case became so popular that it is now known as the “trial of the century." His record keeps filling up with more and more crimes. Finally OJ may be put in prison! With a couple counts of armed robbery, conspiracy to commit burglary with a firearm, and other crimes, OJ may have had his last stand.

Seeing this article really frustrates me because it took this long to get this man into prison. It seems like people can do whatever they want because the penalties they receive are not harsh enough. Maybe if he was jailed before this, Simpson may have seen reality and understood that he cannot do whatever he wants . More and more issues are occurring where pro athletes commit crimes and they can just get away with them. I see a similar future with Michael Vick. Hopefully they will stop him before he gets out of hand. There needs to be the same penalties to all people, whether they are famous or not.

Group 3 (Bryanna McCarrell on Sentencing)

Prosecutor Who Opposed a Death Sentence Is Rebuked (New York Times, September 15, 2007)

Robert E. Owens, an Alabama prosecutor, was criticized by the state attorney general for arguing that a man on death row should not be put to death because the gunman in the execution he was a part of was not put to death. Marcus Presley was convicted with LaSamuel Gamble for the murder of two people at a pawn shop in 1996. A security camera shows that Presley was the gunmen in the crime and Gamble only checked the victims’ vitals and picked up the shell casings. Both men were sentenced to death before an amendment ruled it unconstitutional to sentence anyone under 18 to capital punishment. Presley, the gunman who was 16 at the time, was then put to life without parole. Gamble, who didn’t pull the trigger, was 18 so he was still on death row until winning his appeal to convert his sentence to life in prison just last week. The state attorney general says he will try to reinstate the death penalty on Gamble.

I do not think that Gamble should be put to death since the gunman in the crime wasn’t even put to death. The state attorney general is wrong in criticizing Robert Owens. Owens makes a very good point when he says, “I couldn’t lay my head on my pillow at night if I stood by and let a person who didn’t kill somebody be executed when the person who did kill somebody was not.” The evidence was there that Gamble didn’t kill the victims so why was he sentenced to death in the first place? Even if Presley was executed, Gamble should not be. However, if Gamble is executed, Presley definitely should be too. Presley was the one that pulled the trigger and should not be able to get away living if Gamble does not.