Court Observation Essay
For an opening assignment into Business Law, we as the students were assigned to observe and report a court case following a Trial, Criminal, Civil, or Appellate proceeding under our own discretion. With these restrictions set, I decided to attend a case at the Temecula Superior Court and happened to find myself in the case of a man named Herrera Salguero, Jorge A, located in their courtroom numbered 301. I was able to attend the first trial on October 20th, 2014. I was unable to attend the following trials but did glean all the information needed in my single viewing. As I will continue, you will discover how I went through the laborious process to find this case, how the trial unfolded, and what I as a viewer was able
…show more content…
Going to the court nearly every day until a civil case was found. As I entered the courthouse, I followed the same routine. As I approach the metal detector I knew to empty my pockets, and ensure I removed all metal items I was wearing. The lethargic guard ushered me through the metal detector as if I was a baby unable to commit any sort of smuggling act through the device. As I approached the screen showing me what cases were in order that day, I anxiously searched for a case I could involve myself in. The cases displayed were not labeled to show me what I needed, so I relied on the clerk to tell me where to view a case that would suit what I needed. Every time without fail she told me to go to the third floor of the building; this is where I was able to find all of the criminal cases. As I was not completely understanding of the workings of the courthouse, all I was able to sit in at first was hearings, which took up my hours of my time. When I continued to search for the right case I found myself in small claims and this was not what I was looking for. Another few days had past and I knew I had to find something worth my while. This is when, on the elevator up to the third floor yet again, I caught a glimpse of a large group of people about to enter a case named Herrera Salguero, Jorge A. along with the case
Steve Bogira, a prizewinning writer, spent a year observing Chicago's Cook County Criminal Courthouse. The author focuses on two main issues, the death penalty and innocent defendants who are getting convicted by the pressure of plea bargains, which will be the focus of this review. The book tells many different stories that are told by defendants, prosecutors, a judge, clerks, and jurors; all the people who are being affected and contributing to the miscarriage of justice in today’s courtrooms.
"The Carlos DeLuna Case: Definitive Proof That Texas Executed an Innocent Man? - The Week." The Week. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014.
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.
The O.J. Simpson trial, as it became known, opened on January 24, 1995 and concluded October 3 the same year. Over the span of the trial, the prosecution team presented 72 witnesses including friends and family of Nicole, friends of O.J., and a 9-1-1 dispatcher. Given the trial’s notable and well-known defendant, those involved in the trial gained lifetime fame. To this day I can still recall the names Judge Lance Ito, Marcia Clark (Deputy District Attorney), and Simpson’s defense counsel, “The Dream Team,” which consisted of a number of high-profile attorneys, most notably Robert Shapiro and Johnnie Cochran. I chose this case because it left a lasting impression in my memory, as well as a lasting impression in our nation’s memory. There have been many high-profile cases over the years, but this case was not predicted to end the way it di...
For the court observation assignment, I visited the Tolland County Courthouse. I went to court on Tuesday April 4th, 2017 from 11am to 12:30pm. The matters I observed in the courtroom regarded a restraining order from an ex-girlfriend to her ex-boyfriend. The details involved in the case included the welfare of their three-month-old baby and the custody battle.
The following assertion intends to provide an in-depth insight into my personal experience observing a trial in the Supreme Court of Victoria. This paper will outline a selection of many pressing issues noticed throughout my observation, more specifically those regarding the law and language in legal arenas along with symbolic and architectural traditions that reinforce prejudice towards those from a low socio-economic background and ethnic minority groups. Furthermore, it will argue how symbolism, architecture and practices within a court are in place to create a power dynamic and reinforce the courts British-'western' sovereignty and royal-like wealth which in turn intimidates members of the community especially from ethnically diverse or disadvantaged groups. I intend to demonstrate the power and authority of judges and the courts by drawing comparisons between the judges status in a court room with royalty and religious pastors, through the observation of attire, title and actual positioning in a court room.
Latson, J. (2015). Why It Took Three Juries to Convict the Menendez Brothers. Retrieved from
Reflection on Courtroom 302 The judicial system offers an intricate web of interrelated elements that influence the quest for justice. Every facet provides a distinct viewpoint on the pursuit of justice and equity, from the complex dynamics of jury deliberations to the philosophical underpinnings of sentencing procedures. By looking at various situations and cases, this research seeks to clarify these intricacies and give light to the potential and difficulties present in the legal field. The tension between utilitarian ideals and retributive justice is at the heart of the legal system.
First off, the Supreme Court of Canada, although not as interesting as the Elgin St. Courthouse, was very interesting nonetheless. When we had arrived at approximately 9:30 in the morning, I did not know what to expect, what I was going to see. And, as we entered the courthouse—in a single file—I could not help but chuckle at the extreme security measures, and why they were put into place. Ten minutes later, after the tour guide had finished speaking, he had asked for volunteers to be involved in the mock trial. I was hesitant at first, but I decided to play the part of the lawyer at the end. As a result, I was to defend a victim of a shoe robbery, and put my acting skills to the test. At first, I read the script word for word, but soon afterwards, I became so comfortable with the hypothetical case that, by the end, I was capable of making my own closing statement without the script. In doing so, I felt like I was in a law show, fighting off crooks and giving them their deserved punishment. As a matter of fact, at the end, the defendant and I had one the case. On the whole, the Supreme Court of Canada and the mock trial in particular enhanced my field trip courthouse experience.
“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.
The courts have the function of giving the public a chance to present themselves whether to prosecute or defend themselves if any disputes against them rise. It is known to everyone that a court is a place where disputes can be settled while using the right and proper procedures. In the Criminal court is the luxury of going through a tedious process of breaking a law. Once you have been arrested and have to go to court because of the arrest, you now have a criminal case appointed against you. The court is also the place where a just, fair and unbiased trial can be heard so that it would not cause any disadvantage to either of the party involved in the dispute. The parties are given a chance to represent themselves or to choose to have a legal representative, which is mostly preferred by many.
The courtroom is a place where cases are heard and deliberated as evidence is produced to prove whether the accused person is innocent or guilty. Different courtroom varies depending on the hierarchy and the type of cases, they deliberate upon in the courtroom. In the United States, the courts are closely interlinked through a hierarchical system at either the state or the federal level. Therefore, the court must have jurisdiction before it takes upon a case, deliberate, and come up with a judgment on it. The criminal case is different from the civil cases, especially when it comes to the court layout. In this essay, I will explain how I experienced a courtroom visit and the important issues are learnt from the visit.
The Justice Professional. vol. 15(3): 273-299.
to six individuals in the parking lot that look as if they are going to start
“It is the very people who no one imagines anything of who do the things that no one can imagine” There is an age-old conflict between the human need for community and security found within society and the will to be an individual and think for one’s self. It is human nature to struggle to please others and fit societal norms whilst remaining true to oneself. More often than not, one is forced to choose between the two opposing values, thus sacrificing the other. He who sacrifices societal values for his own truth is often subjected to censure, albeit it is often the outsider who contributes to the progression of society. This phenomenon is demonstrated in the film, The Imitation Game, directed by Morten Tyldum through the character of Alan