Court Proceedings Court proceedings are the most public manifestation of the criminal justice process, the arena in which justice is very literally "seen to be done". This is especially true of the trial, generally assumed to be the stage in the process where the defendant has his or her day in court and the opportunity to assert innocence. The trial is a vial part of the adversarial system, and as we have seen the right to trial by one's peers, represented by the jury system, and as we have seen the right to trial by one's peers, represented by the jury system, is seen as a fundamental protection for the defendant against the power of the state. A Crown court trial has some of the appearance of a theatrical performance with costumes, ceremony, dramatic settings and seating for audience. These dramatic qualities are also evident in the cross-examination of witness to see who will play their part well, and the speeches of counsel to win the sympathy of the jury. They play out their roles in line with the adversarial principles of the trial. The prosecution and the defence counsel present their arguments before a judge whose role is to ensure a fair trial, and the jury, who must decide on the guilt, or not, of the defendant. The real life drama of the trial lies in its public examination of and formal adjudication upon matters of human weakness and wickedness. At a more prosaic level, the trial seeks to establish the guilt, or otherwise, of the accused. Whether a trial takes place in the magistrates' court or the Crown court, the key issues ... ... middle of paper ... ...d, convicted of murder after being found guilty of killing a man in a road rage incident on the M25 motorway. The uncertainty of the jury in their way of thinking would most ultimately result in the uncertainty of laws as well. Some have advocated the abolition of the jury; replacing the jury with lay accessors or allowing the judge to decide not only on the law, but also on guilt and innocence. Others fear the power which would be placed in the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice (Lord Runciman 1993) did not recommend the abolition of juries but recommended that the law be amended in order that the matter could be fully assessed. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. The Friday Review - "The Independent" pg3 (28th April 2000) 2. Smith And Keenan's English Law By Denis Keenan Publisher: Pitman (London) 9th Edition
This chapter is mainly devoted to the jury selection process and how it is taken care
Sets forth procedures for a judicial officer to order the release or detention of an arrested person pending trial, sentencing, and appeal
Siegel, L., & Worrall, J. (2017). Pretrial and Trial Procedures. In Introduction to Criminal Justice (15th ed., pp. 389-395). Wadsworth Pub
as to whether or not a case is taken up. This is what decides the
Next, comes prosecution of the defendant by the state attorney, then incitement, the filing of information by prosecution to decide whether to proceed to trial. Followed by arraignment, which is the plea of guilty or not guilty, pretrial detention, plea bargaining, trial, and sentencing (Process of Criminal Justice). For O. J. Simpson, this process started with the investigation of the murders of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. The same day the bodies were discovered, Simpson flew back from Chicago to Los Angeles. Upon his arrival, authorities took him into custody and began their questioning.
In this essay, I will be examining how the court system can fail to deliver justice for particular cases and people’s circumstances, as well as looking at alternatives to court, like circle sentencing, restorative sentencing and alternatives for children to the formal court system, as outlined in the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW). Crime is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. On the other side of this is justice; the quality of being fair and reasonable.
accused of a crime. The individual has a right to a trial and to be judged by a
Now, the district court system is the beginning step of the judicial system. A good amount of the case handled by the district court system is either criminal or civil trial cases. According to Roger Miller, “trial courts that have general jurisdiction as to the subject matter may be called county, district, superior, or circuit courts.” The majority of their cases are to be handled in-county first before proceeding further through the court system. Just as businesses and organizations have a chain-of-command or protocol system the government has the
Now that we have discussed the pretrial occurrences, we get into the trial portion of the court process. This is the portion of the process in which both the defense and the prosecution present their cases to the jury, the judge, and the rest of the courtroom. To select a jury, the bring in potential jurors and ask them questions,
The criminal trial process is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society to a great extent. For the law to be effective, the criminal trial process must reflect what is accepted by society to be a breach of moral and ethical conduct and the extent to which protections are granted to the victims, the offenders and the community. For these reasons, the criminal trial process is effectively able to achieve this in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury system.
I attended the Circuit Court at 140 Blountville Bypass Blountville, TN on April 24th, 2014. I sat in on Judge Robert Montgomery’s court. Judge Montgomery started court promptly at 9:00 a.m. After going through the metal detectors, I asked the officer working the metal dictator if I could ask to sit in on a criminal court that was going on that morning. He then directed me to the printed docket on the table in the waiting area. The docket is the official schedule of proceedings in lawsuits pending in a court of law. Courtroom 1 had seven pages of cases ranging from violations of probation to rape of a child and Courtroom 2 had one jury trial case of a vehicular homicide that finished the day before. I walked into the administration office and asked if I could get a copy of the docket for when I sit in on court that day for my Legal Process class. I waited until the bailiff called everyone in, and I went in as well and took a seat in the front row in the middle next to another classmate. After waiting a few minutes the bailiff tells everyone to rise while Judge Robert Montgomery entered the courtroom to begin the proceedings.
McOskar Enterprises, Inc. owns and manages a health and fitness center identified as “Curves for Women”. Tammey J. Anderson, the complainant, joined Curves on April 2, 2003. As part of the joining process Anderson signed a release of liability agreement. This agreement released Curves from any liabilities related to injuries that might be sustained by contributing in any activities or through the use of equipment. The agreement also stated that participants agreed to all risks of death or injury that could occur, Anderson read and signed the agreement of terms with Curves. After completing the liability agreement, Anderson began working out under the observation of a Curves’ trainer using the machines within the facility. During the workout Anderson notified the trainer that she began to feel pain in her neck, shoulder and arm, but finished her workout. She continued to feel the pain when she got home and pursued medical attention. As part of her prescribed medical treatment she was sent for a course a physical therapy. In June 2003 Anderson underwent a cervical discectomy, a procedure used to treat nerve or spinal cord compression. After her procedure Anderson sued Curves, claiming negligent acts during her workout. Anderson v. McOskar Enterprises, Inc., 712 NW 2d 796 (Minn. 2006).
Key aspects of the preparation stage, as defined by Budjac Corvette and utilized by juror 8, include preparation occurring prior to the negotiation meeting, research, and determining negotiation tactic and style. Throughout the jury deliberation, juror 8 disclosed information
At 1:30 p.m. on a Monday afternoon, I entered the San Bernardino Justice Center in Downtown San Bernardino for my first court visit. After passing through the metal screen detectors and making my way up to courtroom number 19, I opened the courtroom doors plated “Judge Harold Wilson” and nervously checked in with the bailiff and the court clerk. The judge, judicial clerk and two attorneys were already in the room chatting. I was surprised to hear the friendliness in their tone and conversation they all were having regarding their personal lives. The attorneys from opposing sides were chatting like they were best friends. I asked the bailiff, “If this is normal?”, he said, “Yes it is! and whatever they show on TV is not reality.” Soon after our conversation, the bailiff brought in the defendant. He was well dressed, black male, probably around the age of 35. He sat down next to the defense lawyer and the chit-chatting resumed. After 20 minutes of laughter and constant bantering, the judge asked the bailiff to bring the jury inside. As the bailiff walked outside to call the jury in, the judge went to his chambers.
For my observation, I chose to observe a civil case that had to do with a divorce. I did some research on the cases, and chose one that was similar to an experience I went through. My parents are currently separated, and my father simply refused to pay child support. He lives outside of the state, so it was hard for my mother to have face to face confrontation with him. She got tired of raising three kids on her own, and finally decided to take him to court. I was required to serve as a witness. This took place in 2009, so I was thirteen years old and didn’t really understand much of what was going on. I timidly walked to the stand and was sworn in. I then answered the questions the attorney asked me.