Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Criminal justice system of the US
Criminal justice system of the US
Criminal justice system of the US
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Criminal justice system of the US
The main aim of the Justice System is to obtain the truth and enforce laws, statutes and legislation created by the government. However some would argue that some legal procedures in some countries are not as efficient as others at find the truth of what actually happened. The two systems which are constantly being analysed is the Adversarial and the Inquisitorial procedure which both have supporters and critiques, advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, the main aim of the essay will be to demonstrate how legal systems available in some countries are sometimes insufficient in finding the truth of cases and subsequently leading to miscarriage of justice. The essay will do this by focusing on showing a brief history on the development of the current British legal system. Secondly, comparing and contrasting the adversarial and inquisitorial system. Additionally, showing the advantages and disadvantages of these procedures by focusing on four main areas such as, the legal representations, the police, the judges and lastly the defendant. Finally, the paper will conclude by answering the question of whether the adversarial nature of trials provides an effective means of getting to the truth of what happened.
The legal system during the medieval era was not as sophisticated or as concerned with human rights as the much as the justice system is today. Additionally, Hosteller (2008, p. 9) reports that treason and felony cases of those accused were not permitted to have legal council present to support them. He also goes on to state that during this period many trials were, trials by ordeal where by a person was likely to be kill or tortured in a brutal fashion such a trial by fire, water, or battle. However, these forms of the ...
... middle of paper ...
...ice: The History and Origins of Adversary Trial. Winchester: Waterside Press.
Malleson, K. (2007). The Legal System. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dammer, H.R. (2013). Comparative Criminal Justice Systems. United Kingdom: Cengage Learning.
Doak, J. and McGourlay, C. (20120. Evidence in Context. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Newburn, T. (2009). Key Readings in Criminology. Cullompton: Willan Publishing.
Smith, C.E. (2003). Courts and Trials: A Reference Handbook. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
Holt, R. (4th June 2010) The Telegraph. Available from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7795117/The-Guildford-Four-in-the-name-of-justice.html [Accessed 10th December 2013]
Human Rights Act 1998 [online]. Legislation. Available from:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/enacted
[Accessed 13th December 2013]
Criminal law attempts to balance the rights of individuals to freedom from interference with person or property, and society’s need for order. Procedural matters, the rights of citizens and powers of the state, specific offences and defences, and punishment and compensation are some of the ways society and the criminal justice system interact.
The English court system is adversarial in nature whereby the court takes the role of a moderator and pities the parties against each other so as each can prove their own case. Therefore, each party seeking to be believed will approach the court and give an account of the events that make up the dispute. The court will later on come to a final conclusion on who is liable or if the accused is guilty after considering all the facts, the documents adduced.
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
Robinson trial; (2) prejustice and its effects on the processes of the law and society; (3)
The jury system is essentially a descendant of Great Britain, the Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians. Colonialism played a significant role in the development of the jury system globally. However, despite colonial influence, judicial systems across the world have taken their own way. As a result, the jury system has developed and changed to suit the needs and social conscience of different countries. Across the world, juries examine and decide the facts in a jury trial, the accuracy of the testimony, the guilt or innocence of criminal defendants, and liabilities in a civil litigation. Today, many countries such as Britain, United States, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Australia, France, German, India, and so on practice jury trials. These countries will be the issue of discussion in this paper.
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.
From conception in the Magna Carta 1215, juries have become a sacred constitutional right in the UK’s justice system, with the independence of the jury from the judge established in the R v. Bushel’s case 1670. Although viewed by some as a bothersome and an unwelcomed duty, by others it is perceived to be a prized and inalienable right, and as Lord Devlin comments ‘ trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution : it is the lamp that shows freedom lives.’ It is arguable that juries bring a ‘unique legitimacy’ to the judicial process, but recently it seems that their abolition may be the next step forward for the UK in modernising and making the judicial system more effective. Many argue that jurors lack the expertise and knowledge to make informed verdicts, along with views that external forces are now influencing juries more heavily, especially after the emergence of the internet and the heavy presence it now has on our lives. Yet, corruption within the jury system is also internal, in that professionals and academics may ‘steamroll’ others during deliberations about the case. These factors, coupled with the exorbitant costs that come along with jury trials creates a solid case for the abolition of juries. On the other hand though, the jury system carries many loyal supporters who fear its abolition may be detrimental to society. Academics and professionals such as John Morris QC state that; 'it may well not be the perfect machine, but it is a system that has stood the test of time.’ Juries ensure fair-practice within the courtroom, and although controversial, they have the power to rule on moral and social grounds, rather than just legal pre...
There were only a few things allowed in prison and writing books was one of them. Morte D’ Artur was written in prison (Kinsinella). Most of the time a trial would be used if there was no hard evidence against the incriminated. There were three types of ordeals that a person could be put through. The fire ordeal would be where the accused would have to walk a distance of about nine feet while holding something that was scolding hot such as a rod (Duhaime). After they walked the distance their hand would be wrapped in bandages. Then the person that was wrapped in bandages would be told to meet back after three days in front of the court if there were any signs of healing then that person was looked at as innocent. The ordeal of water was done in two different ways cold and hot. The cold way was where the accused had their hands and feet tied up and they were put into a body of water, if they floated they were innocent if they drowned they were guilty. The hot way was very similar to the fire ordeal, where the accused had to put hands in boiling water to grab a stone and after three days if healed they were innocent (Duhaime). The reason for the two types of ordeals being involved as much healing as it did because it was believed that the God would intervene and help the innocent and let the guilty perish. The third type of ordeal is combat and this would be used if two parties were accused with no witnesses the two parties would fight, most of the time it was to the death, the winners were said to be innocent (Duhaime). Most of the time the people that had enough money would hire champions (Alchin). In the early 1300’s the Medieval customs of trial by ordeals would be replaced with jury because people started to realize it was too hard to convict someone under the
Within the Federal Government there are three main branches; “the Legislative, the Judicial, and Executive” (Phaedra Trethan, 2013). They have the same basic shape and the same basic roles were written in the Constitution in 1787.
“ ….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).
Parliament, the supreme law-making body, has an unrestricted legislative power, and the laws it passes cannot be set aside by the courts. The role of judges, in relation to laws enacted by Parliament, is to interpret and apply them, rather than to pass judgment on whether they are good or bad laws. However, evidence has shown that they have a tendency to deviate from their ‘real roles’ and instead formulate laws on their own terms. Thus the real role of a judge in any legal system continues to be a phenomenon questioned by many. 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 Civil Procedure Rules recognised in Wales and England imposes a positive duty on the court to encourage parties to use an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures if the court considers it appropriate, from the forgoing it could be inferred that achieving unbiased and objective dispute resolution is no longer the exclusive claim of the adversarial legal process as hitherto claimed by liberal societies. In addition, exact practices of adversarial legal system scarcely exist, since the daily life of court now involves routine departures from its original fundamental ideals. Nonetheless, growing evidence depict that mediated outcomes are more likely to be complied with than court decrees contrary to the position of pro adversarial advocates.
United Kingdom is a country with a distinctive set of legal system. It is fairly different from other countries having civil law based legal systems. The legal system in the United Kingdom consists of various sources of law, where other civil law based countries rely only on a written set of law. European influences on the English Legal System came much later in near decades. This essay will aim to examine the development of the English Legal System by reviewing applications of various sources of law in the English Legal System furthermore to discuss the recent European influences on the law of England.
Firstly in this report, I will be giving the different definitions of rule of law by different philosophers; secondly, I will be applying the rule of law to the English Legal system and thirdly I will be explaining separation of powers with a focus on the impartial judiciary. Finally, I will be using cases to support every detailed point given.
Laws serve several purposes in the criminal justice system. The main purpose of criminal law is to protect, serve, and limit human actions and to help guide human conduct. Also, laws provide penalties and punishment against those who are guilty of committing crimes against property or persons. In the modern world, there are three choices in dealing with criminals’ namely criminal punishment, private action and executive control. Although both private action and executive control are advantageous in terms of costs and speed, they present big dangers that discourage their use unless in exceptional situations. The second purpose of criminal law is to punish the offender. Punishing the offender is the most important purpose of criminal law since by doing so; it discourages him from committing crime again while making him or her pay for their crimes. Retribution does not mean inflicting physical punishment by incarceration only, but it also may include things like rehabilitation and financial retribution among other things. The last purpose of criminal law is to protect the community from criminals. Criminal law acts as the means through which the society protects itself from those who are harmful or dangerous to it. This is achieved through sentences meant to act as a way of deterring the offender from repeating the same crime in the future.