Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Bias in the judicial system
Bias in the US justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Bias in the judicial system
It would depend on the case that I have coming up in front of that judge and prosecutor. This is not an uncommon thing that occurs because the judge and prosecutor know each other very well, especially in smaller jurisdictions. The fact that both are married would not lead me to think that anything inappropriate is taking place unless I had knowledge of an affair taking place. I understand that perception is reality and people will judge you off of what they see you do regardless of your intentions (Pollock, 2017). If it was a high profile case, I may feel compelled to ask the judge to recuse himself because I would not want anything to influence the outcome of my case. If I did not and I felt that the judge was being biased during the
trial, knowing that they were eating together would make me think that there is something unprofessional going on. I am not downplaying any of my other cases, but I do not want to cause animosity between the judge and prosecutor because I will be working future cases in that jurisdiction. If my client was found guilty and I knew that he or she was not and I felt that there is something unethical going on between the judge and prosecutor, I would use that information on the appeal. I would feel that is why my innocent client was found guilty and I cannot allow my client to be wrongly convicted because of unethical conduct. Reference: Pollock, J.M. (2017). Ethical Dilemmas and Decisions in Criminal Justice (9th ed). Boston, MA, Cengage Learning.
The book, Celebrated Cases of Judge Dee (Dee Goong An), takes place in China, during the Tang dynasty. The Tang dynasty took place from 618-907 CE and included both Confucian and Legalist influences. Located in the Province of Shantung, is the town district called Chang-Ping, where Dee Goong An served as the town 's magistrate. A magistrate is a judge, detective, and peacekeeper who captures criminals and is responsible for their punishments. The people of China looked at magistrates as the "mother and father" of their town. Magistrates received a large amount of respect from the people due to the amount of authority and power they had. With so many people relying on him to make their home
The judge was more interested in making the character of Vinny look bad. Vinny was not ready to appear in front of a judge of any kind. There are judges out there that probably do hold lawyers to a very high standard. It did seem a little extreme in the movie. The judge should have spoken with the defendants to make them aware of the lack of qualifications of their lawyer Vinny seemed to have. A real Judge would have tried to make it clear to the Defendants about the inability of Vinny to represent. In a way the movie kind of showed that Vinny may not be the best choice of lawyer, when the Judge started talking down to Vinny.
The job of a criminal lawyer is quite difficult. Whether on the defense or the prosecution, you must work diligently and swiftly in order to persuade the jury. Some lawyers play dirty and try to get their client off of the hook even though they are guilty without a doubt. Even though the evidence is all there, the prosecution sometimes just can’t get the one last piece of the puzzle to make the case stick and lock the criminal up. Such is the case Orenthal James Simpson.
Due to the excessive media coverage of this case, I do believe the jury should be sequestered. Kobe Bryant is a very high profile athlete with many supporters as well as those who believe he is guilty. A sequestered jury would benefit both the prosecution and defense. The isolation of the jury would help to ensure a fair trial by preventing exposure to prejudicial publicity. In a jury trial, the evidence the jurors use to render a verdict should come only from the prosecution and defense. Such evidence is protected by the "Rules of Evidence" enforced by the judge. This case also presents special circumstances due to the "Rape Shield Law" a non-sequestered jury will be exposed to evidence not allowed by law at the trial that could prejudice their verdict. In a trial with the notoriety of the Bryant, trial sequestration also makes sure jurors are not pressured by the views of others they might come in contact with in the general public. Finally, sequestration protects jurors from threats that might be made by people trying to influence the verdict.
The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period.
In this essay, I will be examining how the court system can fail to deliver justice for particular cases and people’s circumstances, as well as looking at alternatives to court, like circle sentencing, restorative sentencing and alternatives for children to the formal court system, as outlined in the Young Offenders Act 1997 (NSW). Crime is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as an action or omission which constitutes an offence and is punishable by law. On the other side of this is justice; the quality of being fair and reasonable.
Now, this brings into question if public defenders are ethically competent to represent their client in court with such a workload. The Supreme Court states that if the criminal defense attorney does not review each lawsuit they receive with sufficient time and resources dedicated to each client “then both the system and the attorney are in breach of their ethical and constitutional obligations to that defendant” (Mosher). In other words, the lawyer assigned is not allowed to handle a case if they are forced to spend more time on one over the others
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 use of evidence and witnesses is a mechanism in which the law attempts to balance the rights of victims and offenders in the criminal trial process. Evidence used in court are bound by the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and have to be lawfully obtained by the police. The use of evidence and witnesses balance the victims’ rights to a great extent. However, it is ineffective in balancing the rights of offenders. The law has been progressive in protecting the rights of victims in the use and collection of evidence and witness statements. The Criminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence Complainants) Bill 2014, which amends the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, passed the NSW Legislative Council on 18 November 2014. The amendment enables victims of
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.
(a) Prosecutors have nearly limitless discretion in the most critical matters they must consider, yet they are held to very high ethical standards.
The ideal society we would all be considered equal, but reality often defies this idealism. When we think of police officers, we think of people working hard to keep us all safe, but this may not always be the case in today 's society. This is demonstrated in an opinion piece published in the Miami Herald, entitled “Need a ‘big, bad dude’? White criminals need not apply” by Leonard Pitts Jr. The article opens by discussing the shooting of African-American man Terence Crutcher, where the police officer who shot him stated it was due to him not obeying her orders and reaching inside his SUV for a weapon. However, the video of the shooting shows that this did not happen. The article also goes on to discuss other African-Americans shot in recent
Many judges, whether appointed or elected, tend to serve for life. Often times, once they are in place, then it is very difficult to remove them. The advantage of having judges that are older is for their experience and wisdom. These judges are typically able to make sound judgments. They have obtained a degree of respect from their community and judicial colleagues. If a judge is able to maintain a sound mind and is physically fit to stay on the bench, then there should not be a cause of concern. However, with the aging process, the human body begins to decline. Unfortunately, sound judgment and memory begins to diminish. The body begins to weaken and it becomes increasingly difficult for a judge to keep up with the demand for the job. Often time than not, the judge is the one who decides when he should step down. If he a defiant person, then that decision will be a difficult one for him to make even though his stepping down would be for the betterment of all people. Most judges are able to continue serving even into advanced ages. As long as they are capable, then they should continue to do
I chose to be a witness, which made me feel more involved in the action of the case. This role came with a sense of responsibility because I had to be sure that I was presenting accurate information to the court so a reasonable judgement could be made. Within this case, the defendant McCauley Malkin had been charged with a felony grand theft auto and a felony receiving stolen property. He supposedly stole a 2013 red Corvette from Jets Car Sales, owned by Michael Zumboni. As a witness, I didn’t expect to have any massive involvement in the case rather than presenting my evidence when I would be called up for questioning. I expected to learn what it would be like to actually get questioned in the court in front of everyone and what it would be like to get asked questions you may not have an immediate answer
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