INNOCENT FUGITIVE Erin Eagleton has been on the run for months after her ex-boyfriend was killed in front of her. She escaped from the killer once, but the police consider her a prime suspect. She is determined to prove her innocence and bring down the real criminal...before he finishes the job. Her high school sweetheart, Capitol K-9 officer Chase Zachary, has been searching for her with his trusty police dog. Now that he's found her, he vows to keep her safe at all costs. He'll stop at nothing to reveal the truth--and to protect the woman he's never forgotten. Capitol K-9 Unit: These lawmen solve the toughest cases with the help of their brave canine partners.

Ten true tales of people falsely accused detail the flaws in the criminal justice system that landed these people in prison

Taming the Presumption of Innocence provides a comprehensive account of the presumption of innocence in criminal law and procedure. It maintains that the presumption is a vital component of the proof structure of criminal trials.

She has fought for sixteen years now to prove her brother's innocence. When the courts and the cops didn't listen, she marched on to the legislature and the Governor. Finally, she found her support in the media. Even her detractors refer to her as tenacious. The Governor's Attorney said unequivocally that if he ever got in trouble, he was going to adopt her as his sister. Now, nearly every public figure knows who she is and what her cause is, but knows if they can't answer her questions satisfactorily, they will see her outside their window with her lawn chair and protest poster. Real people, real events and real consequences, that is the hard driving message of this book.

Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman were brutally murdered at her home on Bundy Drive in Brentwood, California, on the night of June 12, 1994. The days and weeks that followed were full of spectacle, including a much-watched car chase and the eventual arrest of O. J. Simpson for the murders. The televised trial that followed was unlike any that the nation had ever seen. Long since convinced of O. J.’s guilt, the world was shocked when the jury of the “trial of the century” read the verdict of not guilty. To this day, the LAPD, Los Angeles District Attorney’s office, mainstream media, and much of the world at large remain firmly convinced that O. J. Simpson got away with murder. According to private investigator William Dear, it is precisely this assuredness that has led both the police and public to overlook a far more likely suspect. Dear now compiles more than seventeen years of investigation by his team of forensic experts and presents evidence that O. J. was not the killer. In O. J. Is Innocent and I Can Prove It, Dear makes the controversial, but compelling, case that it may have been the “overlooked suspect,” O. J.’s eldest son, Jason, who committed the grisly murders. Sure to stir the pot and raise some eyebrows, this book is a must-read.

This book explains the historical significance and introduction of the presumption of innocence into common law legal systems. It explains that the presumption should be seen as reflecting notions of moral comfort around judgment of others. Specifically, when one is asked to make a judgment about the guilt or otherwise of a person accused of wrongdoing, the default position should be to do nothing. This reflects the very serious consequences of what we do when we decide someone is guilty of wrongdoing and is not a step to be taken lightly. Traditionally, decision makers have only taken it when they are morally comfortable with that decision. It then documents how legislators in a range of common law jurisdictions have undermined the presumption of innocence, through measures such as reverse onus provisions, allowing or requiring inferences to be made against an accused, redefining offenses and defenses in novel ways to minimize the burden on the prosecutor, and by dressing proceedings as civil when they are in substance criminal. Courts have too easily acceded to such measures, in the process permitting accused persons to be convicted although there is reasonable doubt as to their guilt, and where they are not guilty of sufficiently blameworthy conduct to attract criminal sanction. It finds that the courts must be prepared to re-assert the prime importance of the presumption of innocence, only permitting criminal sanctions to be imposed where they are morally certain that the accused did that of which they have been accused, and morally comfortable that the conduct being addressed is worthy of the kind of criminal sanction which prosecutors seek to impose. Courts must be morally comfortable about the finding of guilt, and the imposition of the criminal penalty in a given case. They have lost sight of this moral underpinning to criminal law process and substance, and it must be regained.