Civil And Criminal Justice: What Are Witnesses?

Psychological research shows that eyewitness testimony is not always accurate; therefore it should not be used in the criminal justice system. Discuss.

Having witnesses that can explain in detail what happened is a huge advantage because if it wasn't for them, there is not even an idea of exactly happened. There is also a possibility that they can give a description of the offender. Upon acquiring the new information it can narrow down the list of suspects making it that much easier to put somebody behind bars.

The impact of eyewitness testimony upon the members of a jury has been the subject of various research projects and has guided the policies formed by the federal government regarding its competent use in criminal matters (Wells, Malpass, Lindsay, Fisher, Turtle, & Fulero, 2000). Therefore, eyewitness studies are important to understand how

Prosecutors normally meet witnesses at a relatively early stage in the proceedings to discuss special measures and related issues. The witness’s overall subjective experience of participating in criminal proceedings might thereby be enhanced.

The mystery, “Witness for the Prosecution”, was produced in 1957 by Arthur Hornblow, Jr. and directed by Billy Wilder. The two lead male actors were Tyrone Power as Leonard Vole and Charles Laughton as Sir Wilfrid Robarts. The lead female actor was Marlene Dietrich as Christine Helm.

Eye-witness reports. These are reports that explain what may have happened when the event occurred. For example, a robber robs a bank and there are eye-witness reports describing the identity

It has been shown that eyewitness misidentification is one of the biggest factors in wrongful convictions, which has been overturned due to DNA (Innocence). Forensic evidence is one of the factors used to determine ones’ guilt or innocence in the court of law; however, some of the evidence used can pose a problem in court. Eye witness testimony has caused a lot of faults in court cases because it is portrayed as a strong factor of evidence. Eye witness testimony should not be used as primary evidence because of how unreliable, misidentified, and the impact it can have in the court of law. Eyewitness identification should have different alternatives in how it should be presented to the witness so that bias is not present.

Turning to the case of Guy Paul Morin, one will see that the witness account played a great deal in the conviction of Morin. Mr. X falsely testified against Morin because he did not like Morin. The crown also used evidence from undercover officers where statements of Morin were recorded on a 60 minute tape recorder, which the officers believed to be 90 minutes. This made the case interesting because the crown used this instance for saying that Morin confessed to the crime after 60 minutes. This showed false accusation that was made both by the police officers and crown attorneys.

The courtroom is a vital part of the criminal justice system, and a major role in the judicial branch of our government. In the courtroom there are specified roles given to certain people that allow them to to actively engage in the system and get it to work efficiently and properly so that justice is served. The major roles of the courtroom work group are: Police officer, prosecutor, defense attorney, judge, defendant, victim, bailiff, court reporter, and the jury. In this essay I will describe in depth the responsibilities of each of these important courtroom characters.

As research shows, eyewitness misidentification is the single greatest cause of wrongful convictions nationwide, playing a role in 72% of convictions overturned through DNA testing. In this paper, I am going to revisit two cases that were affected by this striking procedure of eyewitness misidentification, efforts currently being made to address this problem, and my personal recommendations to minimize cases surrounding the topic illustrated in this paper.

The people’s duty in this organization is to free the innocent, that have wrongly been declared guilty for example, because of eyewitness misidentification. Eyewitness testimony is an account of a bystander who witnessed a crime and is based on their observations. An observation is a comment or statement based on what someone saw, heard, or observed. Witnesses are not always accurate

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

During the trial, all evidence from both the prosecution and the defense is brought forward, and witnesses are brought in to testify in front of the judge or jury. This is when the prosecuting attorney pleads his case of guilt and the defense attorney casts doubt on the prosecution’s case, while proving the innocence of their client. Each trial has a set routine that it mostly adheres to. It starts with each attorney giving their opening statements, moving on to the presenting their cases while

They read out that charges, swear in the witnesses, tags evidence, and the paperwork from the crown prosecutor and the defence counsel to the judge. The court recorder types what is going on the said in the trial, word for word. This is for the records and transcripts that may be useful and crucial for future uses. Observers of the public may watch a trail that is being held, but they have to be respectful and quiet during the trial. Courtroom organization is very important and has to be respected as the decisions made inside can deeply positivity or negativity affect someone’s life. It is important to the study of law because it is where citizens have the opportunity to protect their own rights and freedoms listed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Courtrooms are important to our unit about criminal law because criminal cases and trials are held inside. Hence, they are very important to the study of law because it enforces the laws in the Canadian law

Once the jurors had been sworn in, the prosecuting barrister began with her opening statement. She reminded the jury of their role, which was to weight up the evidence in order to decide on the facts of the case. In comparison, the role of the judge was to interpret the law and direct the jury accordingly. Although there was reference to statute when the defendant was read his charge, the remainder of the trial was less concerned with the law and more focused on establishing the facts of the case. The prosecution called 3 witnesses in total, all of which were police officers. Once they arrived in the witness stand, they were asked to swear an oath.