In the world, there are two justice systems; the adversary system and the inquisitorial system. The adversary system, used in countries such as Australia, The UK and The USA, is a justice system involving two parties make allegations before a judge . The inquisitorial system however, used in countries such as Europe, Africa, Asia and South America is a justice system which aims to find truth through discussion and investigation . The adversary system, has five main features plus numerous underlying features. In the adversary system, there are two parties, the plaintiff and defendant in a civil case and the Director of public prosecutions (DPP) or police and the defendant in criminal cases. There is also an independent and impartial judge, who stands alone from the legislative and executive arms of government. The judiciary is also impartial to both of the parties to ensure that there is no bias when it comes to creating a verdict. In the adversary system, …show more content…
In the inquisitorial system, it is believed that all outcomes are just. This is because the judge is trained specially to collect and weigh evidence with the objective of revealing the truth. As this is so, a trial will not proceed unless there is strong enough evidence in order to convict the accused. It is also believed that the inquisitorial system has greater accessibility than the adversary system as the investigation, preparation and presentation of a case are done by the state, so individuals are not left with high legal fees. The inquisitorial system also offers an intermediate verdict of “charge not proven”. This advantage ties in with a just outcome, as it allows for a trial to be put on hold until further evidence can be collected, ensuring that a guilty person is not set free. The inquisitorial system also does not see a jury. This ensures that no unqualified persons are determining the fate of another
The law is seen in two ways; as being fair, neutral and having an unbiased arbitrator,
One of the benefits of due process is demonstrated in the Belshaw case. The inquisitorial system of justice is based on crime control; the Swiss police had a hard time in Canada with Mr. Belshaw, because of his right to due process, under Canadian law. Both systems of justice share common beliefs, for example, they both look for proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In Canada we fight about facts and laws, where-as the inquisitorial system searches for the facts. The adversarial system has a separation of powers with the police, crown, defense, and the judge. It is quite different for the inquisitorial system of justice, the police do the arrest, then they present the facts to crown, which then decide if they have a case and turn over the evidence to the judge. The only problem is that the judge decides what will lead them to the truth. How any evidence was collected is irrelevant. In due process if the police obtain evidence and violate the law or a persons charter of rights and freedoms the judge will exclude the evidence from the hearing, even if it would help or prove that the person is guilty. These two systems of justice are generated in democratic traditions.
At trial, your life is in the palms of strangers who decide your fate to walk free or be sentenced and charged with a crime. Juries and judges are the main components of trials and differ at both the state and federal level. A respectable citizen selected for jury duty can determine whether the evidence presented was doubtfully valid enough to convict someone without full knowledge of the criminal justice system or the elements of a trial. In this paper, juries and their powers will be analyzed, relevant cases pertaining to jury nullification will be expanded and evaluated, the media’s part on juries discretion, and finally the instructions judges give or may not include for juries in the court. Introduction Juries are a vital object to the legal system and are prioritized as the most democratic element in our society, aside from voting, in our society today.
“ ….Judgments, right or wrong. This concern with concepts such as finality, jurisdiction, and the balance of powers may sound technical, lawyerly, and highly abstract. But so is the criminal justice system….Law must provide simple answers: innocence or guilt, freedom or imprisonment, life or death.” (Baude, 21).
In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.
The second component of the criminal justice system is the court system. They court system is composed of lawyers, judges, and juries. Their job is to insure that everyone receives a fair trial, determine guilt or innocence, and apply sentences on 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. Even though the jury makes the recommendation for the sentencing of the crime, the judge will follow pre-determined sentencing guidelines to make a final decision.
Mary E. Wilkins Freeman was from Randolph, Massachusetts, born on October 31, 1852. As an American writer, she was best known for her stories and writings depicting characters who endured frustrated lives in New England. In 1867, Mary Wilkins relocated with her family to Brattleboro,Vermont. After studying for a year at Mount Holyoke Female Seminary, which now is Mount Holyoke College, Freeman lived at home where she spent most of her time reading, and writing stories for children. In 1883, soon after the death of her parents, she decided to live with friends, returning back to her hometown of Randolph, Massachusetts. Also, during that same year, she published her first adult story in a Boston newspaper. The best of her work was done while
The adversary system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society through balancing the rights of all parties involved. The adversary system is a system of law where two opposing sides present their case to an impartial
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.
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.
Nearly all non-English speaking industrial democracies use the inquisitorial system rather than the adversary system. In this system, the judge, not the prosecutor and not the defense attorney, calls witness and questions them. Would you prefer being tried under the adversary system or the inquisitorial system? The Adversary system, and I will explain further in my discussion post as to why. Would you have confidence in the willingness of the judge to search out equally evidence for conviction and evidence for acquittal? Consequently, yes, I would have confidence in the willingness of the judge to search out equally evidence for conviction and evidence for acquittal.
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.
A number of differences exist between the criminal and civil court systems. In the criminal court system, the victim reports the crime to law enforcement who may investigate. If adequate evidence is found during investigation and an arrest is made, a prosecutor files charges against the defendant. The criminal court system considers the crime to be committed against the state rather than against the individual victim. In a criminal case, the prosecutor acts as the attorney for all the people of the state or jurisdiction. They control all key decisions of the case, such as whether to charge a defendant and what crime to charge, and whether to offer or accept a plea deal or go to trial. If the defendant
" It is not in truth Alternative'/ It is not in Competition with the established judical system. It is an Additional range of mechanisms within the overall aggregated mechanisms for the resolution of disputes. Nothing can be alternative to the Sovereign in the discharge of the responsibility of resolving disputes between state and citizen or between citizen and citizen. WE can however, accommodate mechanisms which operate as additional or subsidiary processes in the discharge of sovereign's responsibility. These enable the court system to devote its precious time and resources to the more solemn task of administering justice in the name of sovereign." (Street, The language of alternative dispute resolution' (1992) 66 Australian Law Journal, 194)
Human services provides help to individuals, families and children that are in crisis or have needs that are not being met. One of the systems within human services focuses on upholding the law to the fullest extent. According to the National Center for Victims of Crime “The criminal justice system is the set of agencies and processes established by governments to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate laws”. In other words this system seeks out to provide justice and safety for victims of horrendous crimes while also prosecuting those who commit these crimes. This system is in place in order to protect and serve the many individuals in the U.S be it at a local, state or federal level.