Ever since the start of using courts, the main goal of it was to deliver a fair environment where the accused could defend themselves and show the jurors that he/ she did not commit the crime that they were accused of. Sometimes this system fails us and they sentence an innocent man to jail for something they didn’t commit. The activity that I observed in the field of criminal justice was I went to the boulder court house and watched one of the cases that’s was happening that day. As I sat there watching I saw the defendant’s lawyer trying to convince the jurors that his client was innocent, I thought to myself: how can we improve the court room. Sometimes we see some cases where the criminal can be let go because of not a lot of evidence like Casey Anthony. We also might see that the case might be unfair to person being convicted of a crime that they didn’t do. An example of this is the jurors have some past experience with a person of that race and they don’t like them or they already come with a decision before they even hear the evidence found. We might also see a case where the jurors decide that the accuser is innocent even though there’s evidence that proves otherwise. The main point is how we can make …show more content…
Some of them are fairer than others, in Australia they are trying to use technology for the better, in England it’s not as fair as here. ‘The court has the inherent authority to set aside an indictment which, under the circumstances of the case, constitutes 'abuse ' of the defendant.’ (Zamari, p.511) With that they can make sure that the defendant loses or he wins even though he shouldn’t. This also means that people of higher power (celebrities, people who have a lot of money, or people who know people that have a lot of power) can get them out of facing justice. In China we tend to see more corruption in the judicial branch. ‘Insufficient funding in Chinese local courts
Throughout history there have always been issues concerning judicial courts and proceedings: issues that include everything from the new democracy of Athens, Greece, to the controversial verdict in the Casey Anthony trial as well as the Trayvon Martin trial. One of the more recent and ever changing issues revolves around cameras being allowed and used inside courtrooms. It was stated in the Handbook of Court Administration and Management by Stephen W. Hays and Cole Blease Graham, Jr. that “the question of whether or not to allow cameras in American courtrooms has been debated for nearly fifty years by scholars, media representatives, concerned citizens, and others involved in the criminal justice system.” The negatives that can be attached to the presence of cameras inside a courtroom are just as present, if not more present, than the positives that go hand-in-hand with the presence of cameras.
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.
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 Criminal Justice System has a wide range of data collection. A database gives the crime and public safety information used by the similar areas of the criminal justice systems. Technology provides every division of the criminal justice system results to a flawless use of information significant to its role. Information sharing and crime mapping based on trends increase the criminal justice capabilities of federal and local organizations (Foster 2005). Uncle Bob was arrested for this very reason. Through Uncle Bob's story a person can see the process and learn the databases officers have on hand as well as the communication techniques law enforcement agencies use. The tactical information refers to information that the officers get in the field to make an immediate decision. Tactical information helps the officer to get information while just riding around in his car.
This executive summary argues on introducing a criminal code. Criminal code is a document which states the principles and rules by which the society is bound and by violating these rules, there are clear and certain punishments in that document. It seems that criminal code is in the benefit of the society. Its potential advantages outweigh its disadvantages. There is no criminal code in England and wales and one should have to across many cases and paper of legislation to liable the defendant for criminal liabilities. By codification Lay man can also understand the terms of law. So England and Wales should introduce the criminal code.
This is how our laws work now, for the most part. Justice is usually set up and carried out by our police, courts, and other law making officials in our society. Although this system has worked for our society thus far, situations do occur in which our laws are not so clear on. When cases like this happen the court system takes over and then a trial takes place for the offender. A trial is a very good way to ensure that an offender will be treated fairly and they will not be unjustly convicted. Sometimes justice and fairness can be misleading. For example, a trial’s jury members can cause a person to have unjust penalties and or sentences. Jury members may have a personal opinion that conflicts with the case such as racism, their religion, or just pure emotion. Not everyone who participates in this system acts in a just manner. For instance there was a case involving an African American man by the name of Rodney King. This man was allegedly beaten by L.A.P.D. officers while they were attempting to arrest him. Although the beating was caught on tape, it was deemed necessary to be appropriate amount of excessive force by twelve all white male jurors, who found the police not guilty of assault. I would like to see cases like this excluded from happening again. It is important for everyone to get there day in
Most countries in the world today do not use juries, and only a small percentage of cases in the United States are decided by juries. So it has been proven successful and holding trials without juries are certainly a possibility for our future. In may in fact be in society’s best interest to change or rather improve a system that is outdated and doesn’t always serve the people justice. A person has a right to choose between a jury of his peers of a bench (judge only) trial. It’s likely that citizens may prefer a jury trial as they may feel that pool of random citizens may be less critical or harsh than a judge, but in all honesty, if we’re talking about fairness, a judge who is an informed and trained professional definitely has a better idea of how to sentence a person on trial and looks at the evidence in a holistic way. A bench trial is better because it’s more efficient and cost-effective, judges are well-educated professionals, and juries may be biased or incompetent.
Justice is a vital part of the American Court System and influenced and continues to influence since the beginning of American history. Structure and organization is an important factor that creates our outstanding court systems. The State and U.S Constitutions are not the only foundation of the court systems, but also that people that work hard to thrive for justice. Today, justice and equality causes the court systems to change and adapt to continue protecting the rights of the people.
trial has been turned into an entertainment special. There are certain moments in American life that have certain dignity" (38). The judicial system is a very complex system and deserves the respect and dignity that is required. It needs to be taken seriously. The public has no right to make it into a game. This is a serious process of bringing criminals to justice.
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.
In this essay I will be covering the aspects of how the criminology can help prevent future crime. In addition I will be discussing, and analyzing one aspect of how the study of criminology can be a useful endeavor to benefit society and to prevent crimes. I will be talking on how to prevent future crimes with cognitive behavioral therapy.
A case is presented about a company who has hired a supervisor from another subsidiary in the company. In an open department meeting, the system department manager described a concern that promotions were given based on likeability not work quality. The new supervisor met privately with the assistant department manager and exclaimed that she would not accept individuals that are not team players. She requested the managers’ names and expressed if he did not provide information about anyone hurting the company, that he would be considered part of the problem. The following analysis will explore ethical issues from the justice perspective of the assistant manager, supervisor, the company, and stakeholders. Various alternatives will
Within the levels of government, state and local bear most of the costs of criminal justice in the united states (Bohm, Haley, 2014).Bohm and Haley(2014) also state that the percentage of the total budget spent on criminal justice by state and local is about 6.2% of the billions of dollars spent on criminal justice and civil justice. I don’t think that there should be more money spent on the criminal justice system process but I do think police officers should be paid more primarily in the state and local levels. They work awful hours, respond to calls that could be dangerous, see things that the average person doesn't see on the regular, and puts his life on the line for civilians. Their primary focus is to reduce or eliminate crime and keep
Since 1989, there have been no guidance on how we should analyze each factor or how much deference the court should give to police officer. Many courts have simply recited Graham “as if it were a mantra” and then gone on to try to establish what is reasonable for officers to do based off their “intuition.” Graham essentially gives the courts three factors to consider and nothing more leaving each circuit to determine the relevance of each factor and how each factor is weighed resulting in no uniform way to assess reasonableness. Graham does nothing to define the limit of reasonable force, leaving police officers with no guidance on how much force constitutes excessive force.
an outdoor fete in aid of a charity. H offered 50 to anyone who would