Sixteen times Willie Barker's murder case was set for trial, and 16 times it was continued. At first the defense readily agreed, gambling that Barker's codefendant would be found not guilty. Thus, some of the continuances were caused by the six separate trials before the codefendant was finally convicted. Other continuances were granted because of the illness of the police investigator. It was not until five years after arrest that Barker was convicted of murder

What right did Barker's lawyer argue was violated?

a. the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

b. the Seventh Amendment right to a speedy trial.

c. the Eighth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

d. the Fourth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

Question

Sanaa

Social Studies

23 May, 05:26

Sixteen times Willie Barker's murder case was set for trial, and 16 times it was continued. At first the defense readily agreed, gambling that Barker's codefendant would be found not guilty. Thus, some of the continuances were caused by the six separate trials before the codefendant was finally convicted. Other continuances were granted because of the illness of the police investigator. It was not until five years after arrest that Barker was convicted of murder

What right did Barker's lawyer argue was violated?

a. the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

b. the Seventh Amendment right to a speedy trial.

c. the Eighth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

d. the Fourth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

+5

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Eric · Answer 1

A.

Explanation:

The Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees criminal defendants the right to a speedy trial by an impartial and public jury. The sixth amendment also requires that the criminal defendants are noticed of all the acusations agains them and their nature and cause.

In Willie Barker's case, it becomes clear that this right was not granted by the court. Having continuances that slow down his trial caused by the health situation of the police investigator multiple times show that the case was not judged as it should have been.