A fundamental principle of the Queensland’s Court system is the successful delivering of just outcomes for all stakeholders in any trial. The law has been an integral part of society and continues to be the foundation of a civilian community, where, when applied correctly, many disputes can be resolved in a just manner. This report explores the issue of whether courts are intimidating and out of touch, and if presented so, what improvements have been made to these factors to remain valideffective in the delivering of just outcomes. The information in this report was generated based on thorough online research along with information gathered from a visit to the Queensland Courts.
A survey conducted by the UK Home Office Report discovered that
…show more content…
UK Judicial Colleges are toughening their programs introducing lessons about popular culture and social issues to make Judges “fully aware of what is happening on the streets of Britain,” (Doyle, 2012). Many famous cases such as the Gazza case and the “Linford Christie’s Lunchbox” case are a few where Judges are left perplexed at the modern use of slang and popular culture during their case. (Daily Mail, 2012).
The Queensland Court system follows a court hierarchy ranging from the Districts Court to the Supreme Court systems, each having a purpose of resolving disputes in a just manner. While the Queensland judicial system is often perceived as intimidating and out of touch, due to the increasing improvements in these factors, courts remain effective in their delivering of just outcomes. The improvements made to the issues faced by courts as intimidating and out of touch are investigated throughout this report to clearly emphasize that courts successfully deliver just
…show more content…
The weak connection between Judges and the community can significantly impact the delivering of just outcomes as they are unable to understand the popular culture that has most likely caused the common crimes on their streets (cflp, 2013). However, this issue is improved through the introduction of Judicial Colleges where it consists of many courses about the modern world. One course that was recently introduced into the academy is the one formed by Lady Justice Hallett, who had announced in 2012 that the judiciary would be completing social awareness courses to “ensure that they are fully aware of what is happening on the streets of Britain,” (Doyle, 2012). This course allows Judges to understand the social issues of unemployment, housing, drink and drugs, and therefore, is attentive to the problems that face them in court almost daily (Daily Mail, 2012). Without this advanced knowledge taught in these colleges, Judges are seen as “old, white, male elite” and tend to unintentionally apply their past values onto their sentencing, greatly impacting the justice system (Dyer, 1999). While Judges are perceived to be out of touch with the community, improvements have been made to increase knowledge on
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
Just and equitable legal outcomes to evaluate the case include of many expectations that may be met, the outcome of the case was discovered by fair trial which includes correct punishment theories and procedures, Justice Roslyn Atkinson met these through the trial also making it equitable because the punishment theories were applied to the offender Brett Peter Cowan. Punishment options and procedures in Queensland met the current needs of the society throughout this
The areas in which these reforms should occur are twofold. One argument that Judge Ross raises repeatedly is that measures should be taken to insure the sustainability of Family Court employees through more manageable caseloads. The necessity of this change is evident in countless examples of children suffering as a result of constantly changing, thin-spread, staff. In one particular instance, a six month child abuse case is adjourned because they “don’t have the medical records” in time (128). The second argument that can be implicitly made based off of Judge Ross’s expressed frustrations is that, if given the proper time for consideration, there should be more room for consideration of circumstance in Family Court. From a legal standpoint, there is substantial evidence for the validity of a common law approach to Family Court over the traditional civil law. Judge Ross establishes that ideally “In each case to protect children, to assure due process, to remain neutral until the facts are established, to apply common sense and sound judgment within the framework of the law in making decisions—the Family Court judge’s charge lies quite outside the arena of public policy, comment, and debate” (104). However, as seen in many of his cases, the combination of the overflowing workload and an inability to apply proper consideration to any given circumstance makes it impossible for the pre-existing
From the aforementioned cases, it is evident to see that the Australian legal system has not always been fair and just, however, over time it has been shaped and moulded to clearly represent what is now considered to be fair and just in our society. From the procedures and presumptions of how the legal system is administered to the law and regulations which determine what is the crime and punishment – these are based on the transparency, equality, freedom from bias, human rights, and established set of rules adhere to the justice and fairness of the legal system.
Legal system is a comprehensive term that is used to confirm the existence of the law; it also explains the law-making process and how this is enforced on everyone. The Australian legal system regulates all level of governments, organisations, and all people whether they are Australian born or have migrated here, and they must obey Australia’s regulations. The legal system here was developed from the United Kingdom’s legal system, as Australia was a colony of the British. At a glance, the British government granted restricted rights to their colonies, including Australia to set local government system. This was intended to developed laws in local area, also to deal with specific situation at that time. As a result, the legal system in each of the colonies started to develop separately. According to Carvan J (2010) the Australian law is adopted from several sources, including the rules of equity, parliamentary laws, delegated legislations, judge-made laws, and international laws. (Austrlian Legal System, 2007)
In theory all jury systems (which have existed for almost 800 years) are fair and just.
The over-representation of black people in the UK prison population became an issue which needs to be addressed. The prison statistics shows that black people are over-represented and by analysing their population in the UK and a prison statistics it can be noticed that their number increases massively comparing to white and Asian people. The statistics focuses on adult male population, but by considering women and young black people, the evidences show that across all levels black people are over-represented. However, black people are not over-represented only in prison statistics, police practices shows that they are a main target for their actions such as stop and search under section 60 or when fighting in “war on drugs” even that their drug usage is lower than white people. Matthews (2009) and Sampson (1987) provide evidences that one of the reasons for over-representation is institutional racism within Criminal Justice system, police service as well as areas such as Council, education and housing. Newburn (2013) presents that there are specific crimes for which black people are more likely to commit as well as black people are less likely to plead guilty, including that often they leave in inner city cause that judges in those locations are more likely to give “heavier” sentences (Newburn 2013). Furthermore, turning point is given by Wacquant (2001) and his idea of hyperghettoization, he looks at the massive privatisation of prison and provide evidences that the prisons are turning into “ghettos” to keep uneducated, unskilled young black offenders in one place (Wacquant, 2001).
The criminal justice system is dynamic and has changed rapidly since the works of Cesare Beccaria and Cesare Lombroso during Enlightenment Period and this reflects in the issue of intersectionality with the changing approaches taken towards concepts of gender, race and class. Sexual assault will be a predominate study used throughout the essay to examine the different approaches and issues between traditional and non-traditional justices. This essay will first establish where are these intersectionalities found in terms of sexual assault cases and the challenges victims face in the legal process with traditional approaches then followed by a comparison to the transition towards non-traditional alternative justice system has responded with a deeper insight into restorative justices and its effects on resolving these challenges. The role of alternative justice and the key challenges in disproportionate crimes are also important aspects of intersectionality in Australia as they aim to resolve challenges women and the mentally disabled encounter during processing through court in the criminal justice system.
Richard Harding, Roderic Broadhurst, Anne Ferrante, Nini Loh. 1995. Aboriginal Contact with the criminal justice system. Leichardt, NSW: Hawkins Press
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
Johnson, J., Keyzer, P., Holland, G., Pearson, M., Rodrick, S., & Wallace, A 2011, Juries and social media, Victorian Department of Justice, viewed 8 May 2014, < http://www.sclj.gov.au/agdbasev7wr/sclj/documents/pdf/juries%20and%20social%20media%20-%20final.pdf>.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2011). America’s courts and the criminal justice system (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
The next component of the criminal justice system is the court. These courts are ran by judges that make sure the law is followed and oversees what happens in the courtroom. The courts are put in place so that the judges can decide whether to release offenders before the trial, except or reject plea agreements, or sentence convicted offenders (Hoffmann, 2011). The courts provide a set of guidelines that are used to resolve disputes and to test and enforce laws in a fair and rational
Welch, Casey, and John R. Fuller. 2014. American criminal courts legal process and social context. Boston, Mass: Anderson Publishing/Elsevier. http://www.contentreserve.com/TitleInfo.asp?ID={87D1EF0B-F44D-42C6-8A8F-F46D5BACCB4F}&Format=50.
Offenders are protected today by both the rule of law, ensuring that all offenders are treated equally, regardless of their age, sex or position in the community, and due process, which ensures that all offenders are given a fair trial with the opportunity to defend themselves and be heard (Williams, 2012). Beccaria’s emphasis on punishment being humane and non-violent has also carried through to modern day corrections. It is still the case today that offenders must only receive punishment that is proportionate to the crime they have committed and the punishment is determined by the law. The power of the judges and the magistrates to make decisions on punishment is guided by the legislation and they do not have the power to change the law (Ferrajoli,