Courtroom Standards Analysis

There are many parts of the courtroom and the process of convicting a criminal. The courtroom work group has a major role in convicting and finalizing a case. In the courtroom work group, there are three groups of people that hold the entire courtroom together. Without the work group, the courtroom would not flow, and coming to a conclusion to the case would not be as easy. The work group is made up of the Judge, the Defense Counsel and the Prosecution. They work together to reach a result, in the case by staying in contact on a daily basis. There are many roles in the work group, and if they are not all followed through with then the results could be different than what they should be. In this paper, we will

In “The Adversary Judge” Frankel explains how realities of the trial create a “role conflict” between the ideally constructed impartial judge and the realistic adversary judge (Frankel, 1976). Throughout their day people play many roles, these roles are based on the expectations of the people around them and the personality of the person (Frankel, 1976). In particular, judges are expected to play the role of neutrality, intelligence, and patience. Their role is thought to be similar of an “umpire” (Frankel, 1976). It is necessary for them to be objective in order for a just and fair trial to take place. Yet, this ideal role does not occur under the pressure of realities. One reality that pushes away the idea of an “umpire” judge is the heated emotions that occur throughout the trial process. Frankel states” the courtroom explodes as people spring up at several tables shouting objections, usually loudly because they are in some haste and heat to cut off forbidden answers” (Frankel, 1976, p. 472). The attorney’s main goals throughout the trail is to ensure a win for their client leading to competitiveness between both parties. Attorneys do not want to hear they are wrong and always need to be one step ahead of their competitors. This causes the commotion and tense emotions that is usually seen in courts.

I attended the District Court at 201 West Picacho Ave on March 7, 2011. I sat in on judge Mike Murphy's court. Judge Murphy started court promptly at 9:00 a.m. but before I got into the court I had to wait in a long line of about 30 people. then when I finally got to the court house door I had to go through a metal detector where I had to take off my belt and shoes and everything metal on my persons. Then I asked one of the officers working the metal dictator how I could ask to sit in on a criminal court that was going on this morning. She then directed me to court room four. I asked the bailiff if it was ok for me to sit in on court today for my criminal justice class, and if the case where criminal matters. The bailiff then told me that

I observed court operations at the Plantation Key Government Center in Tavernier, Florida twice: on October 7th and November 4th. I observed Chief Circuit Judge Carlos Garcia in courtroom A. The courthouse is located in the 16th Judicial Circuit of Florida and it’s a state trial court with general jurisdiction. The first visit was cut short, in part because it was a lighter criminal day than planned, but also I was flabbergasted by the lack of professionalism that was present in this courtroom. I’m not sure if it’s a “court in Paradise” problem, or something that is observed at other courtrooms, however, I’m disappointed in what I saw. Lack of professionalism was evident during both visits from the actors and their actions in the courtroom.

According to the authors, which of the following suggestions has NOT been offered to permit trial jurors to play a more active role in a trial?

Everyone was subjected to security including the lawyers and employees of the court house. Everyone was either in some type of uniform or dressed extremely formal, even if they were just spectators. Few people were in the court room, but not many. The judge, lawyers and people that were being represented had not still entered the building. Moments later the plaintiff, Dawn-Evans Donahue, and the defendant Joseph Donahue with their lawyers Michael Morris and John M. Makowski, entered the court room. They had taken their place on each of the court room to make their cases in front of the judge. The bailiff then told us to all rise for their entrance of Judge Polansky. We all rose and took our seats. The court had now been set in motion for deliberation. The judge was wearing the standard gown that is portrayed in films and in real life, there was no jury because this was not a trial court, this was a family matters case.

During my two days attending youth court I was in two separate courtrooms. The lay out of these courtrooms was fairly simple. There is a sitting area in each courtroom where individuals can be seated. The individuals seated in this area consisted of the accused parties, witnesses, family of the victims, offenders and general members of the public. There are two stands, one for the defense counsel and one for the crown attorneys. Each side also has a stand for possible accused

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)

Several pairs of eyes trail the prosecutor as he puts forth his reasons as to why the defendant should be guilty. Several pairs of ears listen intently in a trance like mode, also cautious of every detail. The prosecutor presents the facts with great gusto, painting a picture of the defendant in a bad light. Once he is done, the defendant’s lawyer takes the stage and he too, with great effort, puts forth reasons as to why his client is innocent. In the end, when everything is said and done and it time for the verdict, only one voice answers to the court clerk out of the 12 men and women. These 12 people are the jurymen and they play an equally important role as the lawyers and judges of a court trial. In fact, a jury is the sole decider, based

The courtroom workgroup consists of the participants that work for the court. The workgroup is composed of the judge, prosecuting attorneys, defense attorneys, public defenders, and others

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 09-03-2016 at 0930 hours, I was notified by Sgt Kelley of an aggravated battery which occurred at 2111 Roanoke Springs Drive. I was advised to respond to St. Joseph’s Hospital (South) at 6901 Simmons Loop in Riverview. Upon my arrival, I met with Sgt. Kelley, Deputy Karpenske # 249578 and Crime Scene Tech Dewitt. There was a black 2013 Nissan Maxima bearing Florida tag, DGV F36, parked in the emergency room parking bay. I learned the suspect, Joanna Lebrea Lewis had driven the car to the hospital for treatment of the injuries sustained during the offense. It was learned that verbal consent had been obtained from both the victim and suspect to search their residence and vehicle. It was also learned the victim, Marieio Denod Spradley,

The jury sit in a box to one side of the judge. One member is selected as a foreman, this means he or she speaks for the jury.

The movie Twelve Angry Men is about the twelve jurors that could adjust their influence in a decision-making process for conviction an eighteen years-old boy, whether the boy guilty or not guilty in murdering of his father. It represents a perfect example for applicable of a work group development framework. It also has examples of influence techniques among a group’s members. This paper is looking at those specific examples in the movie and focusing in analysis the reasons why Juror 8 is so much more effective than others in the meeting.

The issue of power is inherent in negotiations. In most negotiated conflict situations, one party has more power than another. They may use their greater share of power to shape and manipulate a negotiation to achieve their desired objectives. Furthermore, when the power differential is substantial, this usually has a significant effect on both the substance and process of the dispute. This imbalance in power can be generated by a number of factors such as information and expertise; control over resources (money, supplies, manpower,