Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role of a prosecutor
The role of a prosecutor
The role of a prosecutor
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the judicial process, there are various characters that play an important role in the way a criminal case is handled and have an influence on the outcome of trials. The main players in the courthouse are the prosecutor and the defense attorney. The role of the prosecutor and defense attorney are very different, but the purpose of both of these attorneys is to protect individuals. The prosecutor plays the most critical role in the criminal justice process before, during and after a trial. The prosecutor is involved in investigations, plea bargains, deciding the nature of the charges, and recommending sentences. Although it is not always the case, the main purpose of the prosecutor is to seek justice not to convict. They serve many functions
in the the criminal process and have nearly absolute power in prosecutorial discretion. The prosecutor solely chooses whether or not to present criminal charges once an individual is arrested based on the evidence that they are presented by law enforcement. The prosecutor should have complete knowledge of the investigation because they choose which charges are presented, and they can also choose to completely dismiss the case. The progression of the criminal case throughout the judicial process is completely affected by the prosecutor beginning with an arrest. The prosecutor's office is immensely affected by office politics and public opinion. Prosecutors receive promotions based on the amount of convictions that they have. And the highest prosecutor's office, the district attorney, is an elected role. This can affect charging decisions because the prosecutor is simply looking to get a conviction. The prosecutor may offer better plea bargains in order to persuade a defendant to plea guilty and close the case faster. Prosecutors may also decline to offer bargains in order to force the case to go to trial where they believe they can convict the defendant with a stiffer charge. If a case is highly controversial the prosecutor may push to settle outside of court in order to avoid outside scrutiny, or they may be tougher on individuals during trial for their own reputation.
This trial was between a group called the Mau Mau and Great Britain. Great Britain colonized Kenya in 1895. Great Britain's colonization of Kenya had major effects, good and bad.But in the early 1900’s, the Kenyans wanted independence. They formed a independence group called the Mau Mau. The Mau Mau were mostly made up of a tribe called the Kikuyu. As they tried peaceful protests and demonstrations, the Mau Mau were usually attacked by the British. Britain believed in order to stop the Mau Mau from their independence movement and the violence they were causing on the Britain's, Britain needed to use force. The purpose of this trial was not to make a decision about if Britain's violence was justifiable or not, but to figure out if the Mau Maus
Now that we have discussed the pretrial occurrences, we get into the trial portion of the court process. This is the portion of the process in which both the defense and the prosecution present their cases to the jury, the judge, and the rest of the courtroom. To select a jury, the bring in potential jurors and ask them questions,
...er to adjudicate a case, or hear about a case and then decide on it. These types of cases do not involve as many parties to reach decision. Criminal cases for example, typically involve a plaintiff, defendant, a lawyer for each party, a judge, and a jury. Administrative law cases do not have a jury. A judge will then make a decision after all evidence is reviewed. If the party is not pleased with that decision may appeal the case. From there, it is heard by an appellate board. If the party is still displeased, they can request that it be appealed a second time and it is then moved to federal court (Beatty, Samuelson, Bredeson 68).
The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period.
This will start with the law enforcement officer arresting a suspect for a crime, in this example, for the murder of pop. The suspect will go in front of a judge, where the suspect will be informed of the charges of the crime, a necessary part of due process. The judge, will grant bail, or deny bail, the case will move from the charging attorney to the prosecuting attorney, this is where the prosecuting attorney becomes involved in the case and starts the working relationship with the law enforcement officers, victims and witnesses which are
The court system is composed of lawyers, judges, and juries. Their job is to ensure that everyone receives a fair trial, determine guilt or innocence, and apply sentences to guilty parties. The court system will contain one judge, and a jury of twelve citizens. The jury of the court will determine the guilt or innocence of the individual. The jury will also recommend a sentence for the crime the individual committed.
When it comes to the vague ethics rules and finding effective ways to create a set of clearer ethical standards, legalistic approaches should be taken. Legalistic approaches began in the early 1900’s with the first set of ethics rules, the 1908 Canons. The 1908 Canons stated the primary duty of a prosecutor is to seek justice. The 1908 Canons method failed due to the lack of clarity concerning in depth what the prosecutor’s ethical obligations were. Another remarkable approach was the 1969 Model Rules, which made operational progress in defining the ethical duties of a prosecutor which established a set of rules, but yet and still failed to address the ethical obligation of seeking justice (American Bar Association, 1983). If these legalistic approaches continue to advance and make suitable amount of progress, less failure will occur and eventually the goal of seeking justice will be reached. An effective method to alleviate the vast discretionary authority with little to no transparency would be to use a prosecutor’s handbook (Joy 2006). Both the American Bar Association Prosecution Function Standards and National District Attorneys Association make recommendation of using a prosecutor’s handbook. These written standards bring more awareness to prosecutors allowing them to know the limits of their authority and provides guidance on how to properly exercise discretion. At the last point, inadequate remedies which create incentive to prosecutorial misconduct rather than deter it can be solved by reformation (Caldwell, 2013). Within trial courts, when a prosecutor has fraudulently obtained evidence, the trial court does have to option to exclude the evidence in which has been affected by misconduct. This approach typically does not result in anything further than a verbal reprimand. There are no types of
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.
The use of evidence and witnesses is a mechanism in which the law attempts to balance the rights of victims and offenders in the criminal trial process. Evidence used in court are bound by the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and have to be lawfully obtained by the police. The use of evidence and witnesses balance the victims’ rights to a great extent. However, it is ineffective in balancing the rights of offenders. The law has been progressive in protecting the rights of victims in the use and collection of evidence and witness statements. The Criminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence Complainants) Bill 2014, which amends the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, passed the NSW Legislative Council on 18 November 2014. The amendment enables victims of
This essay will discuss the role of the criminal justice professional in serving both individual and societal needs. It will identify and describe at least three individual needs and three societal needs, in addition to explaining the role of the criminal justice professional in serving each of these needs. Illustrative examples will be provided for support.
If most of the defense attorneys had lost their cases with this judge with this prosecutor but won most of the cases with another judge and prosecutor I will then request a new judge in order to provide my defendant a fair trial. This decision will create animosity and if the judge refuses it could jeopardize the outcome of the case however, I will prove that there is something suspicious going on between the prosecutor and the judge because I will have the past defense attorneys to defend my stand. If most of the defense attorneys had no problem with the judge and the prosecutor in their case then I will just suspect that they are just having a normal dinner without their
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
One contradiction in the job of the prosecutor is that they have nearly limitless direction in critical matters; however, prosecutors’ are also held to a very high ethical standard. Prosecutors must screen cases to determine which ones need to be prosecuted; nevertheless, this is the source of controversy with most people. “What makes charging decisions more intriguing and controversial is the fact that in making this decision, the prosecutor has nearly limitless discretion” (Hemmens, Brody, & Spohn, 2013). This means the prosecutor’s charging decisions are beyond any judicial review, so it must be apparent that a prosecutor
I have chosen to use a criminal defense lawyer as my primary legal career for this discussion board. A criminal defense lawyer, is a lawyer who specializes in defending an individual or a company that has been charged with a crime. Criminal defense lawyers have to deal with many different circumstances. For instance, arrests, criminal charges, investigations, sentencing, appeals, and even post-trial issues. However, a lot of criminal defense lawyers will choose to specialize in a certain type of criminal defense. For instance, drug defense, or even DUI defense. Criminal defense lawyers often have to work out substantive issues in connection with their clients supposed crime. Many times criminal defense lawyers will be helping a client even before charges have been filed against them by
In Brazil the prosecutors main job is to promote justice, as such they have the duty of not only trying criminal cases, but, if during the trial, they become convinced of a defendant's innocence, requesting the judge to free him. The prosecutor's office has always the last word on whether criminal offenses will or will not be charged. Prosecutors in Brazil conduct criminal investigations in major cases, usually involving police or public officials' wrongdoings. Also, they are in charge of supervising police work and directing the police in their investigations. I feel like this is kind of similar to the United States in terms of them trying to promote justice. It is different in terms of the prosecutors here because the judge has the final