Courthouse Paper
There was a plethora of things running through my head as I parked and walked up to the courthouse on Tuesday October 11th such as, was there going to be fancy lawyers and scary criminals? Am I going to be the only one watching if there is not a jury? Am I going to stand out? All of these questions going through my head were making me uneasy but I first became nervous and intimated as I approached the (way bigger than expected) building. I was expecting there to be someone right as I walked in, like a secretary, checking people in and telling them where to go. As I looked around my nervousness continued as I had no clue where to go or what to do, but luckily I knew my court room and floor number before I went so I was able
…show more content…
I sat outside the courtroom and observed the lawyers as they talked to their clients. I was very surprised to see them talking in the open where anyone is able to hear or see what they are doing. I expected it to be more of a quiet and private place. A police officer guarding an unlocked courtroom was kind enough to answer some of my questions about where to go and what to do and about what was going on. I began to feel more at ease and a little less out of place.
I sat through a couple different cases which were a plea hearing, conciliation and a criminal case that had a jury. I got there around 8:20 and left around 10:30 and in that short amount of time learned and observed many things. I listed to two different judges ___ and ____and the second judge I saw ____ surprised me because before the criminal case began and before the jury came in, he came to the benches and kindly asked us to sit in the back row to make room for the jury. He also asked that we don’t talk and if we must leave, exit during a break to not cause any commotion. It took me back that he was so kind and took the time to come up to us and tell us what he expected and what was going on, I assume he figured we had not been to a court case before. I think this was
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.
A dangerous silence envelopes the dark, drab courtroom. It is only punctuated with the hiss of an indecisive fluorescent lamp that seems to flirt with the idea of extinguishing itself completely. The lamp’s dim spectrum illuminates the pallid face of the plaintiff. His bespectacled eyes peer upwards from horn-rimmed glasses. Abruptly, a gruff voice pierces the quiet. It is a voice that wears impressive yet insipid suits. It is a voice that drinks black coffee and smokes generic cigarettes. When it speaks, it asks:
Shelton, Hon. Donald E., Gregg Barak, and Kim S. Young. “A Study of Juror Expectations and
All jurors in this particular case participated and took an active role, yet J1, J4, J7, J8, J12 were the most vocal. J1, J4, J7, and J8 had very strong personalities and naturally appeared to want to be active in the deliberations. J2 appeared to have a strong personality as well, but soon made their mind up about the situation. J1 and J7 as will be discussed later on appear to be the most similar and often support and defend each other throughout the jury deliberation. J12 was active merely because she had to out of self-defense. J12 was the only juror that did not agree with the majority’s conclusions about Ducic and constantly had to defend herself and provide rebuttals with little support from the other jurors. Nevertheless, it appears jurors with strong opinions on the case participate more in the ...
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.
Today juries are much more diverse. Men, women, and people from diverse backgrounds are called to jury duty. Although the origin of the jury system is not clear, history has shown that William the Conqueror from Normandy introduced a similar system to England around 1066 CE (Judiciary of Vermont 1). After the American Revolutionary War, the jury system became the American ideal of justice. This essay will explore the history of the American jury system and illustrate how it has evolved over the course of the American history.
This event overall was very quality. They loaded the auditorium with people as a judge sat on the top of the stage. They escorted in a :criminal” in. Later we would learn he was a drunk driver. He had killed an innocent teen, and injured two others. The girls parents are testifying against him for the murder of their daughter.
The federal government consist of three branches for each one has a specific role that protects and serves each person in the United States. The Constitution established these branches to enhance a stronger federal government as well as to make sure the states worked as one instead as individuals. The method in which it is used goes by Judicial, Legislative, and Executive, these branches go from creating the laws, to implementing laws, to finally interpreting the law. It became known as checks and balances, so that no branch would over power another. Once creating these boundaries, the government became more unified and therefore able to control the country much more formally through the courts. To see the beginning of the never ending, the
As a police officer, I have been to countless court cases and I already knew what to expect from all that were involved. Being in the galley as an observer is entirely different than
videotaping of a real life jury as seen in a small criminal courtroom. The case
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.
Some people say that by watching the court system in action, what once was very unknown and unfamiliar, has now become familiar and useful in helping people become more knowledgeable of what happens inside courtrooms. Most people have not been in a courtrooms and only have the perspective that T.V. gives to them. Now they are able to see what really goes on and now can better understand and relate.
Farther down the hall I hear voices. The general court is in session. Inside the
In conclusion, the courtroom is a very good place to learn and understand the practical side of the law than the theoretical part. This is because a person gets first hand information, and the counsels and the crown prosecutor brings out various facts that are supported by statutes and precedents. Additionally, one gets to see how justice is administered and whether what people say about the justice system is true or false. Therefore, by visiting the courtroom, I have to understand that the administration of justice is fair.
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.