The courtroom is a formal area where power and power relations are established. The language used and the participants involved in court proceedings are some of the various aspects which display distinct levels of power. Throughout the court observation, language was used in a variety of ways depending on who was speaking to who. There are rules employed to regulate the setting of authority in the room and orders expressed to maintain that authority. The courtroom actors also evidently play a role in setting and managing the control in the ritualised space.
The Courtroom’s establishment of supremacy is presented through the linguistic applied throughout the proceedings. When lawyers and judges communicate, an exceeded amount of legal literature is articulated. Whereas when a legal representative questions the witness simple colloquial language is spoken for the witness to understand. The use of legal jargon in the observed courtroom emphasised the distinction between the people who associate their work to the courtroom and the people who are a part of the general public, including the accused and witnesses. This clearly depicted the professionalism and control the workers in the court acquired. Although society does not understand the legal jargon used, if such terminology was not verbalised by the qualified workers the public would question their ability and expertise. Legal jargon is a significant element needed to exemplify the power of the court, and to distinguish the legal personnel’s specialities from the ordinary onlookers, witnesses and accused.
Formalities and rules are rituals applied to strengthen the power of authority in the courtroom. Garfinkel (1956) validates this point in saying there are guideli...
... middle of paper ...
... the courtroom’s setting as it is formed on ensuring the judge’s bench is the point of focus. This set up allows for the judge’s voice to echo ensuring he has the ultimate supremacy over all those below him. It also allows the judge to have the best view of the room initiating him to feel in control of the situation.
In conclusion, the setting and the rules of the courtroom are applied to contain order, to highlight the power of legal authorities and to keep the tradition of control in the courtroom in force. Even though authority maybe overexerted in situations such as questioning witnesses, without it the court would not able to serve its sole purpose in resolving disputes between two party members. Therefore courts establish that language in the courtroom and courtroom actors compose a large part in demonstrating power and power relations in a ritualised space.
The dialogue between the Just and Unjust speech was handled very skillfully on the part of the Unjust speech. Although the points that the Just speech made were what many would consider to be true and right, Unjust speech exemplified a mastery of language by using wordplay and turning any suggestion made by its “stronger” opposition against itself. For example Just speech was implying sur...
There are certain standards that the courts use to determine competency. In order to find the accused competent, a court should find out by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant has remarkable ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational indulgence. The def...
Hariman, R. “Performing the Laws: Popular Trials and Social Knowledge” from Popular Trials: Rhetoric, Mass Media, and the Law, Robert Hariman, ed(s)., University of Alabama Press, 1990. 17-30.
judges are sitting in front of the podium. They seat the accused in between the two front
In Nils Christie’s “Conflicts as Property”, Christie develops an argument in which depicts the concept of perceiving conflict as property and the measure that it impacts individuals and the legal system. This summary will further examine and comply with Christie’s perception, that conflict can be seen as property. In order to examine the argument and perspective of the author, understanding his implementation is of great importance. The ways in which professionals in the area of law can be perceived as “professional thieves”, and the example of laws pertaining to domestic violence, will be further discussed to validate the key concept of conflict as property. In summary; Christie believes that conflict is adverse to growth of the society
Throughout history there have always been issues concerning judicial courts and proceedings: issues that include everything from the new democracy of Athens, Greece, to the controversial verdict in the Casey Anthony trial as well as the Trayvon Martin trial. One of the more recent and ever changing issues revolves around cameras being allowed and used inside courtrooms. It was stated in the Handbook of Court Administration and Management by Stephen W. Hays and Cole Blease Graham, Jr. that “the question of whether or not to allow cameras in American courtrooms has been debated for nearly fifty years by scholars, media representatives, concerned citizens, and others involved in the criminal justice system.” The negatives that can be attached to the presence of cameras inside a courtroom are just as present, if not more present, than the positives that go hand-in-hand with the presence of cameras.
USAID FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. (2005). Model Court Initiative Court Administration Reform Intervention Plan Annex 3.5 - Case Backlog Reduction/Purging Plans . Retrieved from http://www.usaidjsdp.ba/old_page/en/dokumenti/3%20Intervention%20Plan/Annex%203.5%20-%20Case%20Backlog%20Reduction%20Purging%20Plans.pdf
The media plays a big role in shaping the people’s perceptions about the court system. Without media we would remain uneducated to the occurrences outside our social groups. Media and especially news coverage provide us with important point of contact with the rest of society. In debunking popular myths about our court system we will look at the “facts” (the truth, the actual event, a real thing). With a myth being based upon “exaggeration” or heightening of “ordinary” event in life. Myths become a convenient mortar to fill gaps in knowledge and to provide answers to questions social science either cannot answer or has failed to address. Myths tend to provide the necessary information for the construction
In closing, the criminal trial process has been able to reflect the morals and ethics of society to a great extent, despite the few limitations, which hinder its effectiveness. The moral and ethical standards have been effectively been reflected to a great extent in the areas of the adversary system, the system of appeals, legal aid and the jury
For my research paper I decided to observe at the North Justice Center in Fullerton, CA for the morning session. My goal entering there was to watch the process of a criminal trial since I felt that would be the most interesting and would allow me the opportunity to witness all the working parts of our justice system in action. While waiting for the criminal trial to open its doors and start, I managed to come across a post- arraignment court, where I was able to watch a different side of our criminal justice system. This is the side that enforces the punishment and makes sure that restitution is paid for whatever crime was committed. By far the most interesting thing I took from this experience was the differences in how the judges conducted themselves in their courtrooms and the amount of discretion that they were allowed to use. For this paper I will be going over what I observed in both the post-arraignment court and the criminal trial and analyze my findings in a sociological context.
“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).
After analyzing the discourse community of law and the detailed process lawyers take in order to write an effective appeals brief, one can see that lawyers have a very specific and unique way of communicating that includes certain jargon unfamiliar and possibly incomprehensible to the general public. Although writing an appeal brief is only one aspect of many that government prosecuting attorneys such as Kenny Elser face in their jobs on a daily basis, it is also a very necessary job because not only is it used by a single discourse community in the law profession but utilized by the discourse community of law as a whole.
We must consider whether they are “authoritarian law-makers, or if their profession makes them mere declarers of the law”. In this essay, I will argue the ways that judges do make law, as well as discussing the contrary. The English legal system is ostensibly embedded on the foundation of a ‘high degree of certainty with adaptability’ based on a steady ‘mode’ of legal reasoning. This rests on four propositions. 1.
Farther down the hall I hear voices. The general court is in session. Inside the
This narrative exhibits a pattern of employing a multiple complicating actions as the male speaker continually fails to get the information he needs. Moreover, following each complicating action, a series of evaluation occur, which are corresponding items to each complicating actions rhetorically. Moreover, in terms of genre analysis, this discourse features certain characteristics of institutional discourse. The speech of the police officers shows more formulaic forms and lexical features associated with specific police discourse. Additionally, in terms of content, this discourse features linguistic representations concerning legal issues, which involves the state level of knowledge and information about the topic. These factors play a role in identifying this particular discourse as institutional