Courtroom Reflection

Afterward, the defendant council is allowed to cross-examine the witnesses. In the movie, Vinny cross-examines each witness and successfully refutes their eyewitness accounts. The prosecution's last witness is a forensic automotive instructor with the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Vinny objects to this witness because there was no advance notice and he asks for a full day's continuance, but his objection and continuance are overruled. Vinny has no rebuttal for this witness because he has had no time to gather evidence or interpret the reports. Instead, he brings in his own expert witness, Mona Lisa Vito, a former mechanic who proves that there was a second car at the crime scene. The prosecutor asks for a "voir dire," which refers to questioning witnesses about their qualifications. Vinny's final witness, the sheriff, has discovered two men similar to Bill and Stan that drove a similar car and committed the crime. Because of this, the prosecutor asks the judge to dismiss the

Prosecution started with our 1st witness, Chief Osceola. He was born in Alabama. He is the leader of the Seminole Indians in Florida. The direct questioning began with the Indian Removal Act. Chief Osceola says that the Indians were forced to move out of their territory. It was the Americans who forced the tribe to move west. The land in west was a terrible area to build a tribe. Billy was his other name, helped fight against American to try to save their land. Eventually he was put in prison. Their tribe was filled with tons of culture. They ran their culture like the Christian government. They had their society just like the American constitution. The Seminole were willing to work out a

The prosecution, representing the U.S. Government, calls the first witness. A N.I.S. (Naval Investigative Service) officer states that he received a letter from the victim, Private First Class William T Santiago, requesting a transfer off the base. In exchange, the victim would provide evidence of an illegal shooting over the fence line. The offender of the fence line shooting was Lance Cpl. Dawson. The prosecution was trying to show motive by their line of questioning. The defense makes the point

My understanding of the court system has changed almost weekly from the beginning of my semester. I do understand things that I never thought I would’ve have known or even cared about in the least. The book Courtroom 302 has brought an even different side of thinking into this. The book goes into detail about the criminal court in Chicago. He watches all of the actions and different trials that come and go in the courtroom 302. He presents many different cases throughout the book which gives more insight then just a single case.

The prosecution works to get their guilty verdict while the defense tries to help their clients with their verdicts. In court I listen to both sides argue the Innocence/Guilt of the young woman in question wanted on DWI charges. The honorable judge Pauline Hankins presides over the court and waits patiently for all the evidence to be presented. The prosecution and the defense are set on opposite sides of the courtroom while the jury box and the belief are set next to the judge. Judge Pauline Hankins is in the middle of the courtroom in front of the North Carolina State seal with an office on the right next to the witness stand. Everything that has been said in the court is added to the court record. The court record is a detailed document

The second mistake of the use of eyewitness testimonies in the Thompson & Cotton case was the focus Jennifer had on the weapon during

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

The criminal trial process is an interesting process that takes place in Courtrooms all across the United States and throughout the globe. This study intends to set out the various steps in the criminal trial process in the American justice system. A trial is described as a "legal forum for resolving individual disputes, and in the case of a criminal charge, it is a means for establishing whether an accused person is legally guilty of an offense. The trial process varies with respect to whether the matter at issue is civil in nature or criminal. In either case, a jury acts as a fact-finding body for the court in assessing information and evidence that is presented by the respective parties in a case. A judge presides over the court and addresses all the legal issues that arise during the trial. A judge also instructs the jury how to apply the facts to the laws that will govern in a given case." (3rd Judicial District, 2012)

During the trial the court brought in eyewitnesses to testify saying that they saw Sacco and Vanzetti fleeing the scene. At first when Sacco was asked where he was he said he was eating at Boni's Restaurant in Boston, and in Saccos case report it says, “ Seven witnesses testified that they saw Sacco at the restaurant.” When first asked to identify Sacco all of the witnesses had a hard time identifying him. When pictures and stories had gotten around they were then able to say Sacco was at the scene. The police chief of South Braintree said, “the eyewitnesses seemed much more certain of their identifications in the trial than they did at the preliminary hearing a year earlier.”

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

In the electronic world that we live in, every aspect of life can be broadcast across the country in seconds. This aspect is even more realistic when cameras are front and center in American courtrooms. Each morning and afternoon we turn on the television, reality television takes over and civil lawsuits or divorces are being broadcast on shows such as the Judge Judy Show, Judge Brown Show, Judge Greg Mathis Show or Divorce Court. Many people, young and old, are exposed to these reality shows believing what they see is the “real” criminal justice system at

In the american court room there are several people involved. Some of the most important and lawful figures include: the judge, who is the main authority and the one responsible for justice. The prosecuting attorney, responsible for presenting the case against the defendant. The defense counsel, who is in

On September 26, 2017 at 10am, I attended the Juvenile Court Hearings at the Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse in Denver where Magistrate Bartlett was overseeing the hearings. I was able to observe 4 different hearings all for teenage boys, each from a different race or culture. Observing these hearings made everything we learned in class make even more sense and showed how everything in our lesson plan tied in to what these young boys were going through.

During a trial, there are many rules, procedures, and codes of conduct that must be observed. These are in place to allow a trial to proceed more efficiently and fairly for both the defense and prosecution. According to one author, “Police, prosecutors, and criminal court Judges see too much crime, so they tend to see crime everywhere. We need rules to control their conduct, Judges to carefully apply those rules, and other Judges to review those decisions (law-article.net).” Courtroom procedures are important because, without them, defendants and prosecution alike could be treated unfairly. These procedures give a standard format for trials that must be followed to ensure that all parties have an equal opportunity to present their

“Witness for the Prosecution” superbly demonstrated a realist view of the operating procedures in a courtroom. The actors within the courtroom were easy to identify, and the steps transitioned smoothly from the arrest to the reading of the verdict. The murder trial of Leonard Vole provided realistic insight into how laws on the books are used in courtroom proceedings. With the inferior elements noted, the superior element of the court system in “Witness