A Brief Note On Criminology : Group Project Essay

The use of experts within the tribunal system is exploited to a greater extent in tribunals; Doctors Chartered Surveyors and other professional experts can be called to give their opinion on certain forms of evidence. This is the same typically in the court system but in tribunals the Chairperson can ask questions themselves and ask for opinions, in the courts the

I looked at the APA and found that multiple relationships could have been a factor in him serving as an expert witness. The APA 3.07 (2010) discusses third party requests for service and believe this psychologist had multiple

The lawyer of a man who is being accused of murder contacted me. It was requested that I be the expert witness and decide if the man, Edward Gein, is mentally fit to stand trial.

Material Witness: A person who has knowledge in a specific area and whose testimony is vital

I went into Judge Lippitt’s courtroom, there was a new case about Medical mal practice. The counsels and Judge were currently discussing instructions. Plaintiffs counsel was arguing that he needed certain jury instructions because the plaintiff got a bunion echtemy, which required further assistance. Since, too much bone was removed there is an implant, with a need for future replacement. The defense counsel contested, brought about a motion for the instructions because he didn’t want to get the judge in trouble, but the Judge said the instructions were okay. The Judge looked at the trial book, specifically the statement, and it needed no tweaking. Then, they went over the expert list and even if they don’t testify they have to be mentioned for the jury’s sake. The attorneys were from out of town, so they thought the court still had bailiff’s but they just had to edit that. The attorneys are very cooperative. Additionally, the attorney’s look like if they are very use to the trial procedure. They were originally going to start juror selection

Defendant’s motion to exclude testimony from ACI and/or Mark Soderlund is a thinly-veiled attempt to challenge the expert’s credibility prior to trial. Under the Minnesota Rules of Evidence, “if scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion or otherwise.” Minn. R. Evid. 702. Therefore, Minnesota courts find an expert to be competent to testify if

The author provided an in depth analysis of the history and current practices of competency to stand trial. He utilized various articles, assessments and manuals in his review and analysis. His goal was to evaluate current standards and assessments and provide a more effective assessment to be used across the board that addressed all of the various aspects of competency. Otto provided that the concept of competency has been around since the 14th Century. The importance of a defendants ability to participate

There have been more than 2,000 false convictions in the past twenty-three years. Witnesses should not be allowed to testify for a defendant that they know personally. The witness should not be allowed to know the defendant personally because witnesses are a huge part in court cases and memories can easily be changed, witnesses can lie, they can’t always be credible, and it is hard to testify against close friends.

witness(es). If the judge decides there is enough evidence that the person has committed a crime,

Under the New York state law, a defendant must have the ability to assist in his/her own defense, and to be able to understand the nature of the crime and the charges being held

It’s possible that the testimony would be self-incriminating, which would result in them being charged with a crime if they testified for you. The witness has the right to be excused thanks to the protections

Upon watching this weeks lecture, I did not know much about the different reasonings that a witness can/cannot be questioned in court. However, upon watching the lecture, I realized that everyone can be used as a witness within court, although there are some exceptions. One exception is that if a person is incompetent (meaning not showing the skills to do or prove something). If a person is incompetent, they are technically allowed to be used as a witness in a court room. Although, what they say under oath has to be taking lightly under the weight of the testimony. This is because it allows the court to realize that the person’s testimony can not possibly be trusted because of the persons incompetency. An example of a person who is incompetent

A common theory in criminology and in sociology suggests that class and race are vital roles regional crime rates. Previous research indicates that the distribution of class and race within certain residential areas has a key role in the outcome of certain violent acts. In his study, Income Inequality, Race, and Place: Does the Distribution of Race and Class within Neighborhoods Affect Crime Rates, John R. Hipp states “Specifically, studies have tested how the distribution of economic resources across neighbor-hoods, as measured by income or poverty, affects neighborhood crime rates or the how the distribution of racial/ethnic minority members across neighborhoods, as measured by the percent nonwhite, and so on, affects neighborhood crime rates (Hipp 2007). While one may traditionally assume that minorities neighborhoods yield a more intensive crime rate, this is not necessarily true.

Figuring out why people commit crimes is one of the central concerns of criminology. Do most criminals act rationally after weighing the costs of crime? Is society ever to blame for an individual to commit a crime? Do mental diseases or even genetics factor into whether a person will live a life of crime. Over the years, many people have developed theories to try to answer these questions. In fact, the number of theories of why people commit crimes sometimes seems to equal the number of criminologists. I explore these questions and much more in the paper that follow.

The qualities most desirable to be a good lawyer are dedication, motivation and the willingness to work for long hours. Other essential qualities are centered on self-discipline, ability to communicate effectively, good and thorough acquaintance of the English language and the ability to write clearly and concisely.