Criminal Trial Process Paper
Introduction:
In Canada, our criminal trial process is based around an adversarial system. What this means is that the disputants are represented by professionals in the field of law. These professionals are called lawyers. The lawyers work so that the truth of the trial is brought forward and justice is served for the greater community. In the adversarial system it is believed that the search for truth is best served by the parties themselves, through their lawyers and not through the judge. This means that lawyers determine the issue in dispute and decide the best way to argue them. Judges generally play a very passive role in the trial process. Their job is merely to ensure a fair trial for the accused, and to make an unbiased, neutral decision at the end of the trial. This decision is based upon the evidence brought forward by the two teams of lawyers during the criminal trial.
Key Players:
In the adversarial system there are three, and sometimes four key players that make up the criminal trial process. These key players are the Crown attorney, the defence attorney and the judge or justice or the court. There is however in some cases juries involved in the trial process as well. The Crown attorney represents what is seen as the king or queen of the country, however they in actual fact represent the police officers and other law enforcers as well as the general public. The Crown has a very difficult and burdening job. They must find the accused, which is the person being charged, guilty of committing the crime. This decision must be considered and thought to be without a reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt is a very hard concept to define. It is based around the “golden thread” of English law, the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty by his or her accuser. The courts, themselves can not even come up with an exact definition, but have tried their best through this explanation. The concept of whether or not the general public would see as a calmative group a bona fide and required limit on the situation. This limit must be logical and for the purpose of a greater good. Thus the Crown attorney carries an extremely heavy burden when attempting to find the accused guilty of his or her charges. This is thought to give the accused the fairest trial possible.
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.
...ire justice system (Reece, 2014). That includes juries, witnesses, prosecutors, and defence lawyers. In the Provincial Superior Court there's courts of appeals (Reece, 2014). Their role in the system is to go over the statutes and cases to make sure no errors were present in terms of fairness (Reece, 2014). The provincial appeal courts always contains 3-5 judges, no juries, and has private deliberations (Reece, 2014).
They weigh the evidence and apply the law. In the court system, criminal law is interpreted by a jury who are seen as expressing the sense of justice of ordinary men and women. Juries date back to the Middle Ages in England, and while membership, role, and importance have changed throughout the ages, they were part of the system of England’s Common Law. The purpose of the jury system was to ensure the civil rights of the ordinary citizen. It is important to remember that at the time, ordinary people had few rights.
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 book Acquittal by Richard Gabriel states, “juries are the best judges in the system. They are not elected, they don't have the high-powered microscope of appellate review or the stern, disapproving-schoolmarm precedent looking over their shoulder, and they have no interest in the outcome of the case.” For this reason, we can come to the conclusion that the use of juries in a trial is the best for all involved in the legal system. While juries, “are the best judges in the system”, lawyers, jury consultants, and jury scientists are the reasons they are viewed this way. It is their job to make sure that not only their client, but everyone has a fair and unbiased trial.Making sure that “the best judges in the system” are fair and unbiased takes a lot of planning, research, and effort. You must research the jurors, understand how they think, what their morals are, and how they would view this case. “It is a constructed reality, cobbled together by shifting memories of witnesses, attorney arguments, legal instructions, personal experiences, and beliefs of jurors.”(Gabriel
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.
The role of criminal justice professionals is to preserve and uphold the Constitution by enforcing laws, protecting citizen’s rights and promoting justice for all. Police officers in the field of duty must be able to discern situations to be able to act in the most appropriate manner as it relates to their job. In this case study, Officer Smith is threatened with being penalized for making a decision he thinks is good community policing, but his Lieutenant feels he violated protocol. Officer Smith responds to a domestic dispute between an intoxicated husband and wife. Normal procedure would be to arrest the husband and put him in jail until the decision is made whether or not to press charges. Instead, Officer Smith decides to intervene and asks the couple questions about if they love each other, and why they are physically assaulting each other. They respond they do love each other, but the alcohol makes them violent towards one another. Officer Smith then recommends counseling for the couple, as an alternative to putting the husband in jail. The couple agrees to
They are the impartial third-party whose responsibility is to deliver a verdict for the accused based on the evidence presented during trial. They balance the rights of society to a great extent as members of the community are involved. This links the legal system with the community and ensures that the system is operating fairly and reflecting the standards and values of society. A trial by jury also ensures the victim’s rights to a fair trial. However, they do not balance the rights of the offender as they can be biased or not under. In the News.com.au article ‘Judge or jury? Your life depends on this decision’ (14 November 2013), Ian Lloyd, QC, revealed that “juries are swayed by many different factors.” These factors include race, ethnicity, physical appearance and religious beliefs. A recent study also found that juries are influenced by where the accused sits in the courtroom. They found that a jury is most likely to give a “guilty” verdict if the accused sits behind a glass dock (ABC News, 5 November 2014). Juries also tend to be influenced by their emotions; hence preventing them from having an objective view. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘Court verdicts: More found innocent if no jury involved’ (23 November 2013), 55.4 per cent of defendants in judge-alone trials were acquitted of all charges compared with 29 per cent in jury trials between 1993 and 2011. Professor Mark Findlay from the University of Sydney said that this is because “judges were less likely to be guided by their emotions.” Juries balance the rights of victims and society to a great extent. However, they are ineffective in balancing the rights of the offender as juries can be biased which violate the offender’s rights to have a fair
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
The idea of having a criminal law, procedure and a proper court system has been a concern and must in the United States since it was first founded. This concept is always under consistent speculation and undergoes changes almost every year. One of the most influential pieces included into the procedure of criminal law and the court system is the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was created by the representatives of America to not only enforce the idea of substantive law, but also create a framework for the rights of every day Americans. Ever since the creation of the Bill of Rights, there has been a constant need for change laws and procedures in order to accommodate for rights given to each citizen. In this paper, the analysis of the affect of the Bill of Rights will be analyzed as well as the reasons for increased incarceration rates and the issue of plea bargaining.
.... It is deemed that such matters would better be trialed in front of a panel of judges, a recent example of this would be the trial of Pauline Hanson. The jury in the Hanson case, handed down a guilty verdict on electoral fraud and Pauline was sentenced to three years imprisonment. However, within two months, this verdict was overturned by the Queensland Court of Appeal. The appellate judges had noted that the facts of the case would have been too complex for the ordinary man or woman to decipher and Hanson was set free (Lincon,2004).
Judges preside over and apply the law in trials and legal proceedings in accordance to local, state, and federal laws. They guarantee that trials are conducted as instructed by established rules and procedures and endorse the rights of individuals involved in a legal process. In non-jury criminal trials, judges decide a defendant's guilt or innocence, and in civil cases rule on liability and compensation. Judges can be elected by the public or appointed by governments.
As I walked in and I went through the same metal detector. Same guard and lackadaisical nature. Same elevator and third floor. I quickly used the restroom and waited in anticipation for the doors to open to the courtroom. I was finally ready to use the notebook I had brought every time to get down the best notes possible for the assignment given so long ago. As the doors were opened the same jurors walked in and I recognized the judge and deputy assigned to this case from before. This time, I walked in after the jurors and sat in the very back right corner of the room. The room looked exactly the same as before but I did notice there was one other person in the room. I assumed it must be the prosecutor for the case. As I waited for everything
The basic role of the Canadian court system is to deliver justice between two individuals or two individuals and the state. This is achieved through four levels of court. These are the provincial courts, the provincial and territorial superior courts as well as the Federal Court, the provincial courts of appeal and the Federal Court of Appeal and the most powerful, the Supreme Court. All judges are appointed by the Federal government and the provincial government. All of this is done for the needs of the public.
Due to the advances in technology, criminal investigation has improved and citizens expect detectives to unearth findings in a timely and precise manner. However, criminal investigation requires a considerable amount of preparation and training time since it utilizes both science and art. For a computer forensic incident involving child pornography, the investigator must carry out the process in a in an orderly and systematic way analyzing and evaluating the relevant facts.