I observed provincial court on October 27th in Wetaskiwin. My observation conveyed that the important roles of each of the actors had duties, and responsibilities to help the procedures within in the court proceedings to become respectful and professional. As I entered the courtroom I sat in the middle, where the public sits while facing the judge's bench at the other end of the courtroom. The other specters were silent and polite while the trails were in process. Most of the trails were about defendants in jailbreaking probation, which the defendant would be video streamed on a television at the front of the courtroom for the visual opportunity. The crown prosecutor was on the left side and the defense attorney stood on the …show more content…
During the trial, the ultimate authority in the court is the Judge. The judge uses a formal language and a serious dialect to ensure both the rights of the accused and the best interest of the public. In addition, the judge is the most respected person, as everyone was required to bow towards him while entering and leaving the courtroom, including the crown prosecutor and defense attorney standing when speaking. The judge and the madam clerk dresses in a robe, unlike the crown prosecutor and defense attorney as they both wore formal suits. The crown prosecutor was the lawyer providing any relevant evidence and when the witness testified, their questions were based on trying to convince the judge that the defendant was guilty based on the evidence. The defense attorneys are responsible for defending an individual who is accused of a crime as they provide a strategic defense for their clients. The case that I observed involved Aboriginal men and women, therefore, the court will make a decision on Gladue rights by taking into account of the defendant's background. This results in the defendant's background are alcoholism and his brother was murdered at a family party. The defense attorney will base her questions on convincing the dependence innocence, proving that because of the defendant being intoxicated at the time of the offense, he was unconscious state of mind and therefore did not possess mens
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.
This essay will analyze the entire case R. v. Morin and evaluate the facts, issues, positions of the Crown and accused. The decisions made during this case and reasons that ultimately lead to the final verdict by the Ontario Court of appeal. This essay will evaluate the decision of whether the delay of the R. v. Morin and the cases that it set precedent for were valid decisions made by the court. This evaluation will describe the arguments made on both sides during these trials. It will discuss how the decision made by the court to decide the trial delay being reasonable were the correct decisions and that section 11(b) of the Charter was not violated. The essay will also discuss the court cases R. v. Godin...
Blair, Annice. Law in Action: Understanding Canadian Law. Toronto, Ontario: Pearson Education Canada, 2003. Print.
"Canada's Court System." Government of Canada, Department of Justice, Electronic Communications. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Feb. 2014.
At about 1:00 PM, they brought evaluation reports into the courtroom. Defendant got assessed by two different doctors and both came up with the same conclusion that he suffered from bipolar
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 judges that are a part of this group has many different roles, some of which are to issues warrants, making a determination of probable cause in evidence, denying or granting bail to offenders, overseeing trials, making rulings on different motions and even overseeing hearings. The prosecuting attorney is the one who will represent that state in c...
In response, the court system for many years has tried to formulate the policies that will address the issue of public confidence. In the Roberts’ article, it is suggested that even though a slight majority of Canadians have trust in the justice system, the citizens seem to have more faith in institutions other than in the courts (159). This difference is mainly because of the perception that the public has on the justice system in regards to its practices (Roberts 164). The public appears dissatisfied with some practices of the court leading to decreased confidence in the system. For instance, most Canadians feel that the justice system failed to reduce crime in the country. Instead, they argue that it is among the primary causes of increased crime rate (Roberts 164). Most citizens claim that allowing a guilty person walk free is worse off when compared to convicting an innocent one (Roberts 171). Boosting public confidence is, thus, critical to improving the criminal judge. Apparently, this can be accomplished as mentioned by Anthony N. Doob in the article, increased engagement of an ordinary citizen in the courts is needed,
Throughout the years there has been limitless legal cases presented to the court systems. All cases are not the same. Some cases vary from decisions that are made by a single judge, while other cases decisions are made by a jury. As cases are presented they typically start off as disputes, misunderstandings, or failure to comply among other things. It is possible to settle some cases outside of the courts, but that does require understanding and cooperation by all parties involved. However, for those that are not so willing to settle out of court, they eventually visit the court system. The court system is not in existence to cause humiliation for anyone, but more so to offer a helping hand from a legal prospective. At the same time, the legal system is not to be abuse. or misused either.
“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.
In particular, Gallas-himself a former court administrator-thinks that what judges and administrators do within courts is insufficient to explain case processing differences; as he states it, the "local legal culture pervades the practice of law and the processing of c...
The intellectual battle between police officers and suspects has been ongoing since laws were created. Who did it? Being one of the most popular questions around the globe. There is a multitude of different way to figure out who did it, but one of the most common, and often the only, piece of evidence and investigator can gather is a confession. To get these confessions investigators often use a harsh and aggressive method of interrogation known as the Reid technique. The Reid technique uses a multitude of morally questionable methods to gather a confession such as intimidation, telling the suspect that there is evidence placing them at the scene, and continually refusing to accept the denial of the suspect. These interrogations can also last
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.
to six individuals in the parking lot that look as if they are going to start
The case I sat in on was the District of Columbia vs. Thomas. The trial started when the judge walked into the room. I was somewhat surprised by the lack of punctuality, the trial started almost fifteen minutes late. While I was waiting for the judge to appear and the trial to begin I had some time to observe my surroundings.