I Fought The Law and the Law Won Quiz

Answer: Bob Dylan

At first, the testimony of eye witnesses appeared to make this an open-and-shut case. Later, one of those witnesses recanted his testimony, and all of the evidence was called into question. Dylan's song "Hurricane" from his album "Desire" alleges that racial profiling and racism brought about the initial conviction. Dylan also gave several performances to benefit Carter, which allowed the fighter to raise enough money to appeal the decision.

At first, Carter fought the law and the law won. Nevertheless, the boxer was later victorious in his appeal in 1985, and the New Jersey Supreme Court overturned his conviction. A movie was made about his story, "The Hurricane", in which Denzel Washington played Carter.

For more information on Bob Dylan's involvement in the case, please see http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Hurricane-(song)

Answer: Julius was convinced by the government to implicate seven others in a fruitless attempt to save himself and his wife from the death penalty.

There were many irregularities in this case, which most people ran hot or cold on. The FBI decided to include Ethel Rosenberg in their case against her husband Julius just a few days before going to trial because they wanted Julius to cooperate with their case. In fact, the evidence of Ethel's possibly having been the group's typist was put together just over a week. The tactic didn't work, however, and Julius never gave evidence against anyone for espionage.

Though two of the five accused did confess (including Ethel's own brother, David Greenglass), another conspirator, Morton Sobell (who was a Russian Diplomat) and the Rosenbergs always maintained their innocence.

The judge's behavior in the trial was highly irregular and not-objective. One reporter said that the instructions to the jury accused the Rosenbergs of a host of unproven things, and even "blamed them for the Korean War."

In hindsight, it seems that Julius was involved in spying of some sort, but the evidence against Ethel was always very weak, especially given her health problems at the time.

The five people initially accused fought the law and the law won when they were convicted. Only Julius and Ethel were executed in 1953, however, despite the case's having gone to the Supreme Court and Justice Black's dissenting opinion. The other three were able to beat the law in the end and were eventually paroled.

For more information, please see http://library.thinkquest.org/10826/rosenber.htm.

Answer: All of the choices mentioned here were elements of the case against the Colomb family.

All of these were in fact elements of the case against the Colombs. The most persuasive evidence against them was the testimony of a convicted felon, who claimed that everyone in town always got their drugs from the Colombs. When pressed, however, that person was unable to give the name of any other buyers.

At first, the jury quickly convicted all of the family members who were on trial. Then, the prosecutors did something that actually ended up helping the family. They obligated all of the family to stay in jail while awaiting sentencing, and this allowed the Colombs to learn from other prisoners about a ring of paid informants who were willing to testify in any case (regardless of whether they had any real involvement or not) in exchange for a deal to reduce their own punishments.

The judge decided to look into things when he learned of these irregularities. Then, several people who had nothing to gain (and actually had a lot to lose) came forward and said that the testimony against the family was false. The judge eventually threw out their convictions and they were freed.

The Colombs had spent all of their savings and more on court and legal costs, however, so though they fought the law and won in the end, it was not without a high price.

For more information on the Colomb case, please see www.reason.com/news/show/125449.html

Answer: True

Though it can be argued that Carolyn Warmus, a 23-year-old school teacher, was morally wrong to be involved with the husband of the victim, she doesn't seem to have murdered her lover's wife. In her defense, Carolyn mistakenly thought that Solomon and his wife were divorced when they started going out. When Warmus learned that wasn't the case, she continued to see Paul Solomon because he claimed that he and his wife, Jeane, had an open relationship.

Regardless of these errors in judgment, one thing Warmus didn't do was lie about anything related to the murder, if the results of multiple polygraphs she took are to be believed. Perhaps if polygraph evidence were allowed in court, Carolyn could have fought the law successfully.

Her first trial was thrown out of court and the second ended in a hung jury. The third time, Warmus was convicted. Because polygraphs are not admissable, Warmus fought the law and the law eventually won. Warmus is currently serving a life sentence for a crime that many feel her lover, Paul, committed without her involvement.

For more information on this case, please see: http://carolynwarmusjusticefund.org/carolynwarmusorg/id11.html

Answer: She remained loyal to Manson throughout her time in jail, until her death in prison in 2007.

Krenwinkel actually abandoned her loyalty to the Manson family after a short time in prison, and has had good behavior all the time she has been incarcerated. She seems to have tried to do as much as she can to make up for her acts, including social work, participating in 12-step programs (for drugs and alcohol), teaching inmates to read and serving in a program that teaches service dogs to help law enforcement and others who are incapacitated. She seems to have accepted her punishment and told Diane Sawyer in an interview in 1994 that she thinks of the people she harmed daily.

Krenwinkel is now the woman who has been incarcerated the longest in the California prison system. Though she was originally sentenced to death, that was commuted to life in prison in 1972, due to a change in the law in California that affected death sentences levied prior to that date. Thus, Krenwinkel fought the law and the law won. She had been denied parole 11 times. Krenwinkel is not the Manson family member who died of brain cancer while in prison, that person was Susan Atkins.

For more information, please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patricia_Krenwinkel

Answer: Rope

"A Perfect Murder" is actually a remake of another Hitchcock film, "Dial 'M' for Murder", which was about a man who tried to hire his wife's murderer so that he could inherit her fortune. The original film starred Grace Kelly, Ray Milland and Robert Cummings. The remake starred Gwynneth Paltrow, Michael Douglas and Viggo Mortensen. Neither movie had anything to do with the Leopold and Loeb case.

"Compulsion" is based on the case, but it was not directed by Hitchcock. "Swoon" is another more recent version recounting this case, and one that came out in 1992, well after the death of Hitchcock. "Rope," on the other hand, was based on the case and directed by Hitchcock. It starred Jimmy Stewart, John Dall and Farley Granger.

The real case involved two brilliant young men who felt they were above the law. They committed the murder of a friend of theirs on a lark, and then thought they would get away with it, due to their cleverness. Thus, they tried to fight the law, but perhaps their arrogance led them to their downfall. Luckily, the law prevailed.

For more information on this fascinating case, please see http://crime.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ/Ya&zTi=1&sdn=crime&cdn=newsissues&tm=74&f=00&tt=14&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//www.crimemagazine.com/04/leopoldloeb%2C0229.htm.

Answer: The Gentleman Thief

William "Bill" Sutton was a smart Irish-American kid who was better at putting on a show and a swindle than he was at keeping a steady job. His two most common nicknames were "The Actor" and "Slick Willie"--which he earned because of his fondness for easy money in robbing banks and his creative use of disguises to do so. Although Sutton had a reputation of being a gentleman and was always quite polite when he did his heists, he never had the nickname of "The Gentleman Thief". His preferred nickname was "Bill", but the FBI felt that "Willie" went better with the other two nicknames that he had, and "Willie" was the one that stuck.

Sutton was arrested and escaped countless times, finally being sentenced to two life sentences plus 105 years. His sentence was being served out at Attica State Prison in New York when he was released at the age of 68 in 1969 on December 24th. Sutton lived the rest of his life with his sister in Florida, until he died in 1980.

Ironically, the last legal job he had was that of an actor, in a commercial for New Britain Bank and Trust Company.

For more information on this colorful figure who made the Law fight him repeatedly before the law definitively won, see: http://www.fbi.gov/libref/historic/famcases/sutton/sutton.htm

Answer: False

Luckily for him, Sullivan didn't die in prison. The real counterfeiter, a man named Tyler, continued to do the same type of deeds and was apprehended while Sullivan was still in jail. When Tyler was arrested, he happened to admit that he had passed counterfeit funds in the same places and around the same time as Sullivan's supposed crimes. The eyewitnesses in Sullivan's case were shown photos of the two men side by side, and all of them picked Tyler as the guilty party, not Sullivan. The strangest thing about this is that Tyler and Sullivan didn't look like each other at all.

Happily, the innocent man fought the law and won in the end when Sullivan received a presidential pardon from President McKinley in May 1898, about halfway through his sentence.

For more information on this case, please see: http://library.albany.edu/preservation/brittle_bks/Borchard_Convicting/chpt40.pdf (you will need adobe acrobat to view this link)

Answer: Forensic experts said Krone's unusual bite was 100% match to those on the victim's body.

Krone wore a 10-1/2 size shoe, and the footprint left at the scene was from a 9-1/2. In addition, it did not match any of the shoes in Krone's closet. Krone knew the victim only as the manager of a bar he occasionally frequented, but they were not friends. The extraneous hairs found on the scene did not match Krone's hair at all.

The strongest evidence by far presented at the trial against Krone, and testimony that overcame the other deficiencies of the case, was the testimony of dental experts.

Luckily for Krone, DNA evidence exonerated him and helped locate the real killer, who later confessed. Krone's nickname as the Snaggletooth Killer arose from the claim by forensic dental experts that only Krone could have made the bite mark, due to his surgically reconstructed bite that left one of his front teeth out of line. Later, the same experts compared the bite of the confessed killer to those on the body (using impressions made at the time of the autopsy) and then declared that the killer's bite was a better match. Ironically, the killer did not have an irregular bite at all.

For more information on this case, please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Krone

Answer: True

Berkowitz committed several murders of young women with long straight hair in the New York City area, apparently selecting his victims at random and causing panic for the whole time until he was apprehended.

Berkowitz has always claimed that he was part of a Satanic cult that directed him to commit his crimes, and that others were involved. He has come up for parole multiple times since he was convicted, and he has said he does not want to be freed. Berkowitz became a born-again Christian while in custody, and believes that he deserves his sentence and should serve it fully.

If his claims are right, the law may have some more fighting to do in this case to ensure that the guilty parties are brought to justice.

For more information on this case, please see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Berkowitz#Berkowitz.27s_life_in_prison