Cuyamaca College Scott Peterson Case Facts Summary
You may complete this chapter review assignment in teams of two. The case for review is referenced in your textbook and aligns with the learning objectives for chapters 9 & 10. Please remember the point value of each assignment before submittal.
Review: *Conduct a high-level overview of the attached appellate court document on the Scott Peterson (Peterson) case. You are not required to read the entire appellate packet. Answer the questions noted below in essay format:
Summarize the facts of the Peterson case.
Respond to the following questions below:
Q: Was Scott Peterson afforded the opportunity for bail? If so, what were the stipulations of his bail?
Describe the criminal trial process in the case.
Note the outcome of the case.
- Q: If you were the Appellate Judge what would be your decision in this matter and why?
Scott Peterson-Plea Agreement
Rubric: Chapter Review Assignment (1) (1) (2)
- Rubric: Chapter Review Assignment (1) (1) (2)
- This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent/Conceptualization
12 to >11.0 pts
- Response displays a full understanding of the complexity of the issue addressed and multiple points of view. Recognizes varied interpretations and implications. excellent exposition, clearly and concisely written, well argued, and displaying good original input from the student.
Author directly addresses main question or issue, and adds new insight to the subject not provided in lectures, readings, or class discussions. The author has retained nearly all of the knowledge presented in class. He/She is able to synthesize this knowledge in new ways and relate to material not covered in the course. Provides compelling and accurate evidence that convinces reader to accept main argument. The importance/relevance of all pieces of evidence is clearly stated. There are no gaps in reasoning—i.e., the reader does not need to assume anything or do additional research to accept main argument. Conclusion-Elegantly synthesizes and reframes key points from the paper. Suggests new perspectives or questions relevant to the central argument, and brings closure
- 11 to >9.0 pts
Good exposition, but lacks clarity and concision, or doesn’t have much original input, or offers poor support for important claims.
Author competently addresses main question or issue, but does not add much new insight into the subject. That said, it is clear that the author has learned a great deal in class and is able to communicate this knowledge to others. Provides necessary evidence to convince reader of most aspects of the main argument but not all. The importance/ relevance of some evidence presented may not be totally clear. Reader must make a few mental leaps or do some additional research to fully accept all aspects of main argument. Conclusion-Synthesizes and brings closure but does not examine new perspectives or questions
9 to >7.0 pts
Response does not address some aspects of the assignment. (and/or…) Response demonstrates a somewhat shaky grasp of criminological principles. The response represents the authors’ arguments, evidence and conclusions accurately though not sufficiently clearly. (and/or…) Conclusion-Restates the same points as the topic paragraph without reframing them. (and/or…) Introduces new material rather than new perspectives.
7 to >5.0 pts
Author attempts to address main question or issue, but fails. The author has retained some information from the course, but does not fully understand its meaning or context and cannot clearly convey it to others. Not enough evidence is provided to support author’s argument, or evidence is incomplete, incorrect, or oversimplified. Information from lectures and readings is not effectively used. Conclusion-Is missing or cursory. (and/or…) Repeats the topic paragraph more-or-less verbatim.
5 to >4.0 pts
Fails to understand some aspects of the material, and/or is very unclearly written. Main points lack detailed development. Ideas are vague with little evidence of critical thinking. Shows some thinking and reasoning but most ideas are underdeveloped and unoriginal.
4 to >1.0 pts
Response does not address the assignment. Fails to follow format and assignment requirements; incorrect margins, spacing and indentation; neatness of essay needs attention.
1 to >0 pts
Did not submit a paper; plagiarized material; made no effort to understand the material or shows no sign of having read it.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization/Structure/Mechanics
4 to >3.0 pts
Essay contains an intro, main body, and conclusion. Introduction lays out main argument and gives an outline of what the reader can expect in the essay. The conclusion brings everything together, acknowledges potential shortcomings of the paper, and gives the reader a sense of what further work might be done to advance the subject matter described in the paper.
3 to >2.0 pts
The introduction gives the reader an idea of what to expect in the paper, but does not effectively lay out the main argument. It may begin with a set of rhetorical questions, or an anecdote that is never fully explained. The conclusion does little more than restate the problematic introduction. Intro and/or conclusion may be too wordy or short.
2 to >0 pts
Essay has no clear organizational pattern.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSpelling/Grammar/APA
4 to >3.0 pts
All sentences are grammatically correct and clearly written. No words are misused or unnecessarily fancy. Technical terms, words from other languages, and words from other historical periods are always explained. All information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has been spell-checked AND proofread (ideally by you and somebody else), and contains no errors
3 to >2.0 pts
A few sentences are grammatically incorrect or not clearly written. Several words are misused. Technical terms, words from other languages, and words from other historical periods are rarely explained. Not all information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has been spell-checked AND proofread, but still contains several errors. Reader’s ability to understand essay may be compromised by these errors.
2 to >0 pts
Paper is full of grammatical errors and bad writing. Several words are misused. Technical terms, words from other languages, and words from other historical periods are rarely explained. Not all information is accurate and up-to-date. Paper has not been spell-checked or proofread, and contains numerous errors. Reader has a difficult time understanding essay because of errors.
Total Points: 20
Second one Initial post due by Thursday at 11:59 pm | Replies due by Sunday at 11:59 pm
According to the ACLU, bail reform is mandatory to reduce mass incarceration. “The original purpose of bail was to serve as an incentive to return to court when a person is arrested, released, and their case proceeds. However, the current money bail system has little to do with this original intent. Rather it has mutated into a way to separate people who have money from those who don’t. People with money can almost always buy their way to freedom, regardless of the charges against them. Yet people without access to cash too often end up in jail simply because they cannot afford bail, or alternatively, they must take out loans from bail companies that charge exorbitant fees.”
On August 28, 2018, Governor Brown for the State of California signed Senate Bill 10 eliminating the current cash bail system.
TASKS: Click on the link below to review Senate Bill 10 from the link below. Click on the link to watch the brief video on bail from the link below.
(Links to an external site.)Respond to the question:
What is the significance of Senate Bill 10? Support your response with researched information not just your opinion.
Review the video on the Joseph Edward Duncan case from the link below. Duncan was released on bond after allegations of sexual molestation of a young boy.
Summarize the facts of the case.
Respond to the question: If you were the judge would you have released him on bail. Explain your rationale?