Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effective Courtroom Communication
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effective Courtroom Communication
Bailiff Information
During the opening statement, while both defense attorneys displayed a keen knowledge and comprehension of the case, Ms. Sabahat Ibrahim and her partner, Ms. Hiba Mohammad, lacked in regards to passion and speaking loudly. Ms. Ibrahim’s questions demonstrated dexterity, but could have been improved through clarification, as many witnesses were confused. Ms. Nusaiba Baqibillah, however, spoke clearly and loudly. Her dynamic with her fellow prosecutor, Ms. Noorulhuda Qasim, resembled a “bad cop, good cop” routine that often times forced the witness to retract or rethink a statement. Ms. Baqibillah and Ms. Qasim could have mentioned the fact that Napoleon was kind to the nine puppies and sheep to show how he was kind to non-pig
This report is on a movie called, “12 Angry Men.” The movie is about 12 men that are the jury for a case where a young man is being accused of killing his father. A major conflict that is very obvious is the disagreement on whether the young boy was guilty or innocent. After court when all of the men sat down to begin their discussion Courtney B. Vance (#1) Took charge and respectfully was now the leader. He asked what everyone’s votes were and all of the men except for Jack Lemmon (#8) voted the young man was guilty. Because Jack was the odd one that chose differently than the rest of the men, all of the other Jures, were defensive about the evidence just because they were all so confused. Courtney B. Vance took charge once again and calmly stated that everyone has their rights and lets have everyone explain the reasons why they thing the child is guilty or not guilty. Ossie Davis (#2) explained why he voted guilty. While explaining this he was very calm and wise. HE handled conflicts in the same way. Next was George C. Schott (#3) He also voted guilty. George was very st...
There are seven different types of correctional job assignments based on the location in the facility, job description, and the type of contact with inmates (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015). These correctional assignments are block officers, work detail supervisors, industrial shop and school officers, yard officers, administrative officers, perimeter security officers, and relief officers (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015).
The prosecution suffered from staggering tunnel vision in Morin's guilt. Their entire case for both trials was built on a few arguably points. There was the "evidence" of Morin's opportunity to commit the crime, the supposed confessions during interrogation, h...
Someone, suspected of a crime, is arrested by police. Later on, the suspect goes to court to face their charges. A classic episode of Law & Order. But, where do these suspects go in between the two events. They are held in their local jail of course. While people are familiar with the arrest and courtroom scenes from TV, many are unfamiliar with the jail scene, which becomes home to the suspects who cannot make bail until a court rules a verdict for their case.
Even before the jury sits to take an initial vote, the third man has found something to complain about. Describing “the way these lawyers can talk, and talk and talk, even when the case is as obvious as this” one was. Then, without discussing any of the facts presented in court, three immediately voiced his opinion that the boy is guilty. It is like this with juror number three quite often, jumping to conclusions without any kind of proof. When the idea that the murder weapon, a unique switchblade knife, is not the only one of its kind, three expresses “[that] it’s not possible!” Juror eight, on the other hand, is a man who takes a much more patient approach to the task of dictating which path the defendant's life takes. The actions of juror three are antagonistic to juror eight as he tries people to take time and look at the evidence. During any discussion, juror number three sided with those who shared his opinion and was put off by anyone who sided with “this golden-voiced little preacher over here,” juror eight. His superior attitude was an influence on his ability to admit when the jury’s argument was weak. Even when a fellow juror had provided a reasonable doubt for evidence to implicate the young defendant, three was the last one to let the argument go. Ironically, the play ends with a 180 turn from where it began; with juror three
Another powerful opinion yearning to be exposed, is the one held by Henry Drummond, the defense’s attorney. The lawyer undoubtedly came to d...
Her argument was confusing because she gave me the impression that she was arguing for the motion, instead of against. In my opinion, her tone was slow and made it seem like she was not confident about her argument. It was only at the end of her speech where I understood what her main point was; Lennie was slaughtered and murder isn’t allowed in the court. The next two speakers for the opposition side was Tyrique and Anthony, who I felt like both had ineffective arguments. For example, Tyrique addressed the fact that Lennie could have had a chance for surviving and there were other ways to handle the situation. However, all those points were already contradicted by the other team and Tyrique didn’t provide an adequate rebuttal. The strongest and last speaker on the opposition team was Kayla. Her tone was convincing and loud, which caught my attention. She clearly stated something that the others didn’t, which was that Lennie’s death was premeditated and vividly described how it was an inhumane death. However, the proposition team as a whole did not impact me
In the story “In Camera, Saadawi illustrated how women were treated by the legal system in Arabic country when they did something against the system. The protagonist, Leila Al-Fargani, who was a young woman on trial for calling the “mighty one”, which is a respective title for the President of their country, a stupid man. Moreover, during the time she was waiting for the court date, she was brutally beaten and raped by ten men who seem to be the guards. At the time she was in the court, she was still suffering from the pain both in physical and mental way, but she did not collapse. When the time the judge and those with him declared that ten men raped Leila and also her father’s honor got trampled. (This is the way we torture you women- by depriving you of the most valuable thing you possess”). For the response she said: “You fool! The most valuable thing I possess is not between my legs. You are all stupid. And the most stupid among you is the one who leads you.” In one hand, this quote completely showed that the man thought this sexual violence was totally right when the woman had committed a crime. In anther hand, it also showed that in the very deep of Leila, the...
Roger is at the Sage County Jail after being arrested the previous night for a minor offense. This has become a problem throughout the past Roger has been several times before. Roger has a past history of involving involuntary commitment on mental health issues. He told the jail staff that he commits crime to get sent to jail for a warm place to sleep, for a meal, and to get his meds. He is homeless and has no medical insurance or regular health care provider. Roger occasionally gets into fights with other jail inmates, has threatened suicide, and yells at the custody staff. Because of the minor nature of the crime, Roger will likely be released in 24 hours. Rogers meds are very expensive for the jail officials it costs the jail $200 per day to house Roger. So
In the Criminal Justice system, the main goal is justice or in other words, a fair consequence to match a criminal action. An obvious, yet unmentioned underlying goal is to prevent injustice. Many times, justice prevails, and this is why our system prevails today. However, when justice fails, it is key to look at the information offered in order to better the system and to repay those that have been failed by it. One area that has shown itself as flawed is the area of interrogations though many other areas will be presented throughout this paper as well. By examining five cases involving questionable interrogation and showing other system flaws, I will enlighten others as to how our justice system handles its flaws, and hopefully I will provide motivation for further improvement.
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
“they all had the same face. All of them!.... They all gave orders, they all shot! All of them!”(Fink, page 1265) Nearing the end of her testimony, it can be gathered that the first woman is falling apart. Her sentences become shorter, more direct, and she loses focus on the specific details asked by the prosecutor in favor of focusing on her self determined fact that all of them had shot during the liquidation. “I was afraid…. terribly afraid”(page 1264), the same fear that coursed through her that day was showing its face once again, causing this crack in her testimony. Typically if one’s manner of speaking falls apart like so then their body movements also become more rigid as their voice becomes both louder and shattered. Though Fink did not paint the picture of the scene to us directly, she has done so through the characters speech, and from this picture a young woman is seen. A young woman who, though at first had maintained a semblance of composure, had fallen apart into a fit of panic. Another character who shows us a break in composure is the second man. “tried to
The aim of this paper is study the same primary sources that other historians have studied and see what conclusions if any can be drawn from them. The primary sources that will be used in this paper include but are not limited to online transcripts of the trial records, and other material written by the many historians of the years.
“Witness for the Prosecution” superbly demonstrated a realist view of the operating procedures in a courtroom. The actors within the courtroom were easy to identify, and the steps transitioned smoothly from the arrest to the reading of the verdict. The murder trial of Leonard Vole provided realistic insight into how laws on the books are used in courtroom proceedings. With the inferior elements noted, the superior element of the court system in “Witness for the Prosecution” was the use of the adversary system. Both sides of the adversary system were flawlessly protrayed when the prosecution and defense squared off in the courtroom.
For the first mock trial held in class, the case of the stolen lunch, I did not have a large role. I chose to be a part of the jury, which I feel gave me an immense feeling of responsibility and really allowed me to deeply analyze the case as it was being presented. Within this case, Mary Ovechkin, the plaintiff, had claimed that her lunch had been stolen and ate by the defendant, Sammy Crosby. My first expectation of this case, before it had actually started, was that the defense and prosecution would each have time to present their cases. I expected both sides to question those who were involved, such as the witnesses, defendant, and plaintiff. Then I expected to have to come up with my own verdict to share with the rest of the jury based on the evidence presented. Based on my role, I expected to learn how the jury reaches their decisions.