Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Peurpose and history of criminal justice
Peurpose and history of criminal justice
Magistrates and lay people in criminal cases
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Peurpose and history of criminal justice
From doing activity 1.1, it is obvious that the magistrate has a large influence in the criminal justice system in the 18th and 19th century. By looking at the photograph, we can assume that the magistrate is wealthy; as we know from the readings they tended to be prominent local citizens. Further, we can assume because of this, he is from a higher class. This is also evident through his clothing and the way in which he is displayed on a brightly coloured pink chair. When I think of vibrant colours in this time, I think of wealth, and being the magistrate we know that these exchanges would often happen in the magistrates house. As made evident in our readings, the class system was an absolute fundamental to how crime was understood during …show more content…
For instance, these magistrates were known citizens in the local area, not trained professionals. This sets up the whole legal system to be unprecedented and essentially give the magistrates a free for all, the ability to do what they want to do with no reprimanding on their part. They were simply not held responsible for wrong doings, however were held so highly in the criminal justice system and had so much power. This is why it is not surprising that eventually, lawyers and trained professionals started to appear in the criminal justice system to give both sides an equal playing ground. Prior, whatever the magistrate said, simply was followed. This was too much power for a single individual dealing with a case, and often the guilty was not heard, believed, or even given a chance to show their innocence. As discussed in unit one, lawyers were crucial in advocating for the accused. Following the idea that the magistrate was unprecedented, there were no real rules for him to follow. For instance, the magistrate was the sole person responsible for deciding whether or not a case even went to trial. The magistrate could throw a case out for lack of evidence, or if he believed it was done out of spite. Regardless, the magistrate held too much individual responsibility for deciding these actions. This led to the criminal justice system being heavily
Crimes was mostly committed by the lower class, the ones who were poor and unable to work. The working class however were not thieves because they are able to afford the necessities of life. Highwaymen, murder, and theft of property were all common crimes committed by males unlike females whose crimes were infanticide, prostitution, and theft. The Ordinary of Newgate’s Account describes how “William Spiggot was indicted for four several Robberies on the High-Way, and found Guilty, with Thomas Cross otherwise Phillips, and William Burrows” (Ordinary’s Account, 4). As described in the lectures those offences were considered crimes without qualification because they were crimes with victims.
Almost every society in the history of the world has had some form of a judicial court system, but there are obviously major differences in the various court systems. One of the most outlandish court systems has to belong to Salem, Massachusetts in the 1690’s. The court system of Salem, Massachusetts is so memorable because of the events of the Salem Witch Trials. When you compare the Salem courts from the 1690s to present-day America, it will become quite evident all the freedoms that you get today. The Salem courts from the late seventeenth century and the present-day American courts differ in the freedoms and privileges a person was given, public opinion, and religious bias.
Each overlooking a colony or multiple colonies, they were involved in maritime law. The court operated in that there were no jurors present at all during the trial and instead the judge acted as both the judge and the jury in the trial. They heard all the evidence presented to them and rendered a verdict on whether the defendant was guilty or not. It removed any impartialness that a jury would have and left the verdict to the judge 's bias. They were supposed to resolve conflicts between merchants and seamen, while enforcing trade
The judicial system we know today has changed in many ways. One of the ways this system changed is how they reach a verdict, In the modern day long investigation have to take place and reliable evidence has to be shown to the court so that there is less chance that the accused could be misjudged unlike the medieval times were it was common that people were misjudged. The medieval period taught us that we have to be sure of which person is guilty and innocent. Unlike believing one Man’s word like the medieval
Judiciary.gov.uk. 2014. Judges, Tribunals and Magistrates | Introduction to the justice system | Traditions of the courts. [online] Available at: http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/introduction-to-justice-system/court-traditions [Accessed: 2 Apr 2014].
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.
Over the next 10 years the criminal Justice system could entirely change with the passing of a major law, epidemic, or failed service. Consequently, every since 9-11 our justice system has become much more open minded. Therefore, resulting in the strict enforcement of laws to protect its citizens. Nothing ever stays the same for too long. New developments related to science, technology, DNA analysis, and countless other tools and other factors are changing for the better in solving cases, prevention of crimes, and aiding in investigations. Where there is change there will be changes in the way we handle everyday processing. For example, booking a criminal, acquiring evidence, and interrogation. This also results in the field of criminal justice having no choice but to adapt to the slowly changing times or else be left behind.
The media plays a big role in shaping the people’s perceptions about the court system. Without media we would remain uneducated to the occurrences outside our social groups. Media and especially news coverage provide us with important point of contact with the rest of society. In debunking popular myths about our court system we will look at the “facts” (the truth, the actual event, a real thing). With a myth being based upon “exaggeration” or heightening of “ordinary” event in life. Myths become a convenient mortar to fill gaps in knowledge and to provide answers to questions social science either cannot answer or has failed to address. Myths tend to provide the necessary information for the construction
The criminal justice system is composed of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws. The way criminal justice systems work depends on the jurisdiction that is in charge. Different jurisdictions have different ways of managing criminal justice processes. The components of the criminal justice system are law enforcement, prosecution, defense attorneys, courts, and corrections.
The criminal justice system is composed of three parts – Police, Courts and Corrections – and all three work together to protect an individual’s rights and the rights of society to live without fear of being a victim of crime. According to merriam-webster.com, crime is defined as “an act that is forbidden or omission of a duty that is commanded by public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law.” When all the three parts work together, it makes the criminal justice system function like a well tuned machine.
The American court system came to be through the Judiciary Act of 1789 which was signed by President George Washington on September 24, 1789. The constitution had established the Supreme Court, but reserved the authority for Congress to create lower federal courts. This act set the structure and the jurisdiction of such courts and generated the position for Attorney General. The Act also organized the United States into circuits and districts, which formed thirteen district courts, one for each state. Before the modern era, the justice court system used different principles to punish criminals and solve disputes. During the American colonial times, religion was an important influence when the time for a verdict by the court came into play. They would use the principle of “Actus Reas”, meaning guilty act, and “Mens Rea”, meaning guilty mind. They believed that all men are sinners and therefore be punished as such. Sir William Blackstone established and influenced new, but similar, principles that were all biblical-origin and similar to the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Today, the court system is broken d...
The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.
In the courtroom, the judge was presiding over the court, and because the matters were on criminal cases there were jurors. This jury received instructions from the judge about the law, as they were nonprofessional. A jury consists of twelve persons when it comes to serious felonies and six members when it is only a misdemeanor. The reason why the judge gave them the facts on the law was to help them deliberate after the case was over to establish whether the accused person was guilty or not. The judge was referred as to your honor by the counsel, the accused and the prosecution. Additionally, there was the judge’s associate whose duty was to swear in the jury, keep the trial exhibits during the court proceedings and record the court verdict at the end of each trial. There was also the judge’s tipstaff whose work was to announce that the court was in session as well as swear in witnesses. However, the most important duty of the tipstaff is to take care of the jury and escort them ou...
The Selection, Training and Role of Magistrates in the English Legal System Lay magistrates are unqualified, part-time and unpaid profesionals who are chosen to serve in the magistrates court, yet they deal with the vast majority of cases in the legal system. They do not hear cases on their own but sit as a bench or panel of two or three other magistrates. The use of such unqualified people to judge cases is open to criticism. Magistrates sit in a magistrates court, usually in a bench of three.
Along with society’s natural progressive focus on humane, useful and educated responses to criminal behavior, there was a fear of crime that has been developing and also helps to explain the changes in punishment throughout history.