Anton Mulder Case Study

741 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The concept of fairness in a jury trial

Director of Public Prosecutions v Anton Mulder [2007] IECA 63 Court of Criminal Appeal Facts: This case investigates the murder of a woman by her husband, the Applicant, Anton Mulder, who has pleaded guilty to manslaughter but not guilty to murder. The hearing for this case had been interfered by parties outside of the jury. There had been confrontation in the courtroom where there were remarks shouted by the public. Also, the judge hearing the case, Judge Carney swore in jury as he felt that the plea of guilty to manslaughter was unacceptable to the prosecution. Beforehand, one of the men shouting in the case was identified as the brother of the deceased, William Pollock. Judge Carney questioned his reason for being at the case, he was a …show more content…

Pollock asked one of the jurors to borrow the newspaper and he then proceeded to read out an article in the newspaper that referred to this current court case and he revealed himself as the person described in the article who gave an outburst which was a result of his anger, leaving the juror intimidated and unable to continue fairly with the proceedings. Judge Carney spoke with the juror, Mr Paddy O’Brien who insisted that he was able to continue with the trial, which could lead to an unfair trial because of personal issues and involvement. The judge then proceeded with the case provided that all persons involved work in a professional manner and exclude personal opinions and focus on the legal facts of the …show more content…

Clarke the foreman had felt there was no justification to the discharge of the jury because of the fact that it was merely “a slight familiarity” . When he was asked to elaborate he referred the judge to the English case of R v Sawyer [1980] where three members of the jury had a conversation outside of the courtroom with two customs officers. These officers were witnesses for the prosecution of a trial involving the importation of cannabis, and it was believed that the conversation had “nothing to do with the trial” . It was refused that the jury be discharged from this trial because it seemed their conversation was

Show More
Related

  • Michael Moscherosch Case Study

    1324 Words  | 3 Pages

    Michael Moscherosch was born on November 23rd, 1962, in Stuttgart Germany. He and his younger brother were born into a working class family, with his mother working as a full-time accountant and his father working as a car mechanic. The Moscherosch family stayed in Stuttgart for since its inception, the families ancestral roots stem as far back as the 1600s and stayed within Stuttgart and the villages surrounding the area. Michael as a child was described to be scholastic and performed well in his school. In Germany, instead of there being an elementary, middle, and high school, there is a primary school and then secondary schools prioritizing certain fields; some of these fields include engineering, trade schools, and “gymnasiums” which closely represent the structure of our American high schools. Upon completing his secondary school education, Michael began studying Chemistry at the University of Stuttgart, working at night during the week to fund his education.

    Read More

  • Texas V. James Broadnax Case Analysis

    1496 Words  | 3 Pages

    The jury in trying to let the defendant go considered if there were any circumstances that would provide say as a self-defense claim to justify this horrific crime of murder of two people named Mr. Stephan Swan and Mr. Mathew Butler. Throughout the guilt/innocent phase, the jury believes not to have heard convincing evidence the victims were a threat to the defendant nor a sign the defendant was in fear for his life before he took the victims’ lives.

    Read More

  • Picking Cotton Case Study

    1036 Words  | 3 Pages

    The court system includes the judges, jury, prosecutors and defense attorneys. The Attorneys convince the suspects to take plea bargains, the judges are sometimes unfair in the decisions they make, and the prosecutors overlook exculpatory evidence. Picking cotton shows in detail some common errors of the court system. During Ronald Cotton 's first trial, His Attorney, Phil Moseley, tried to bring a memory expert to testify on the unreliability of memory but the judge denied his request. After Ronald 's case was overturned by the supreme court, he got a new trial in another court which had even more problems and bias. First, there was racial prejudice during the jury selection. “Four black people from the community got called in for jury duty. The judge himself dismissed one of them and then Mr turner made sure none of the rest sat on my jury” Ronald cotton stated. Because he was black, the four jurors were dismissed and he was left with an all white jury and two white Alternates. Second, the judge “Held something called a “voir dire” hearing, which Phil explained meant he would have to put up all the evidence about Poole in front of the Judge, but not the Jury”(129). Also, Ronald Cotton 's defense attorney explained to the judge the parallelism between Bobby Poole 's case and the rape Ronald Cotton was charged with. Despite the weak physical evidence against Ronald Cotton, the

    Read More

  • Dusky Vs. 402 (1960)

    1479 Words  | 3 Pages

    John smith, the accused, stood up in the courtroom and started yelling at the judge about what he thought of his innocence irrespective of the decision that the judge would make. He also cursed the prosecutor and kept quiet when his lawyer warned him of the negative consequences that would follow if he continued with the same behavior. Smith did not answer any question that the judge asked him. The prosecutor indicated that he had observed similar behavior when he interviewed him, in jail.

    Read More

  • Uncertainty In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

    980 Words  | 2 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Analysis of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men

    617 Words  | 2 Pages

    Juror #10, a garage owner, segregates and divides the world stereotypically into ‘us’ and ‘them.’ ‘Us’ being people living around the rich or middle-class areas, and ‘them’ being people of a different race, or possessing a contrasting skin color, born and raised in the slums (poorer parts of town). It is because of this that he has a bias against the young man on trial, for the young man was born in the slums and was victim to domestic violence since the age of 5. Also, the boy is of a Hispanic descent and is of a different race than this juror, making him fall under the juror’s discriminatory description of a criminal. This is proven on when juror #10 rants: “They don’t need any real big reason to kill someone, either. You know, they get drunk, and bang, someone’s lying in the gutter… most of them, it’s like they have no feelings (59).

    Read More

  • Jurors on a Death Penalty Case

    956 Words  | 2 Pages

    As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...

    Read More

  • Jury Nullification: Power, Impact and Controversy

    1444 Words  | 3 Pages

    At trial, your life is in the palms of strangers who decide your fate to walk free or be sentenced and charged with a crime. Juries and judges are the main components of trials and differ at both the state and federal level. A respectable citizen selected for jury duty can determine whether the evidence presented was doubtfully valid enough to convict someone without full knowledge of the criminal justice system or the elements of a trial. In this paper, juries and their powers will be analyzed, relevant cases pertaining to jury nullification will be expanded and evaluated, the media’s part on juries discretion, and finally the instructions judges give or may not include for juries in the court.

    Read More

  • Tulsa Race Riots

    1683 Words  | 4 Pages

    “The trial was brought to a speedy conclusion. Not only did Judge Evans find the twelve guilty, fine them $100 each, and committed them to jail, but five people in the courtroom who had served as witnesses for the defense arrested. […] The police were then instructed to transfer the seventeen prisoners that night to the county jail”(30).

    Read More

  • Analysis of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men

    714 Words  | 2 Pages

    As time goes on he becomes more and more passionate and seems to be somehow personally involved with the case. At one point, he tells the other jurors about an argument between him and his son. Juror 3 and his son had an argument which made his son run away. When his son returned to apologize, Juror 3 hit him for leaving the first time thus leading him to run away once more. He has not seen his son in two years and this has left him somewhat bitter inside. His anger toward his supposed ungrateful son is projected toward the young man on trial. Juror 3 has no concern for the life of the defendant. He makes it clear that he would have been an executioner and would have pulled the switch on the boy himself. His personal troubles have imposed on his ability to come to a verdict.

    Read More

  • The Criminal Trial Process

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    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

    Read More

  • Use of Persuasive Argument in 12 Angry Men

    1024 Words  | 3 Pages

    ... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.

    Read More

  • 12 Angry Men: Conflict in the Courtroom

    587 Words  | 2 Pages

    The jurors had several conflicts in disagreeing with each other and it didn't help that they would shout over one another. The very first conflict is when juror 8 voted not guilty against the 11 guilty votes. The other 11 jurors don't seem to want to hear this man out; they don't want to hear why he has voted not guilty. Some of these men, jurors 3 and 7, just want to get this case over with so they can get on with their lives. They don't think it is imperative enough to look over the evidence and put themselves in the place of the defendant. They get upset with this man and try to get him to vote guilty.

    Read More

  • Stereotype

    741 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...y’re dumb. Here is a quote from Mr. Michie before the trial was, “One of the things I’d tried to impress upon the kids throughout the year was the importance of speaking up intelligently about matters that concerned them.” (P.8). What he did to get rid of the thoughts was a court trial, to get everyone involved with the situations; he wanted his students to voiced their opinions about the cased that they felt strongly toward.

    Read More

  • Reflection Paper On Court Experience

    1482 Words  | 3 Pages

    The judge was a middle-aged male who looked intimidating and seemed to be well respected. To my surprise, we did not have to stand up when he entered the room. After the judge came out I assumed the jury would follow quickly after. However I quickly learned that there would be no jury for this particular trial. After a few minutes, the handcuffed defendant entered the room wearing an orange prison jumpsuit. He was a middle-aged, African-American male who was involved in a narcotic conspiracy case. In addition to the defendant a probation officer, the prosecutor and the defendant’s lawyer were also present. Aside from me, my classmate and a student from Georgetown the defendant’s wife and sister were in the

    Read More

More about Anton Mulder Case Study

Open Document