Criminal Law Proceedings All Over Tv Nowadays Essay

Since, modern technical advances allow our culture to live in a generation where our society fosters impatience. Hsieh states, “As jurors demand slicker, speedier bite-like presentation of trial evidence, lawyers are hiring visual artists, computer, graphic designers and illustrators to transform piles of documents into light, sound and images,” (586). Of course, the growing need encompasses opportunity for employment in the audio-visual fields. Consequently, jurors are conditioned to

During this documentary, the viewers get an inside look at how criminal proceedings work. In the courtroom, the most important players are the prosecution, defense, and judge. The judge is in the room to make sure the proceeding runs smoothly and to settle any arguments that arise. The prosecution is there to accuse the defendant for whatever crime he or she has been convicted of. The defense is there to defend the person being convicted of the crime. There is also a bailiff who is there to oversee the court and make sure everyone there is safe. The bailiff will bring evidence form the defense or prosecution to the judge, as nobody is to approach the bench without the judge calling attorneys to the

Bogira paints a portrait of some of the more personal and nuanced day-to-day activities that go into courtroom behavior and decision making. Describe some of the often overlooked aspects of day-to-day court operations (i.e., judges background, public pressures, defense attorney and prosecutorial ambitions, etc.) and how they may affect court outcomes for defendants. Bogira paints a portrait of the real side of the law and after reading Courtroom 302 I’m applauded at the things I’ve read. Bogira’s showed a different side to prosecutors, detectives, and judges detailing the little to no interest they had in righting the wrongs caused by the court.

The CSI Effect is said to have poisoned the minds of jurors and their expectations of presenting evidence by the forensic science T.V. shows like CSI (Crime Scene Investigators) influence their perceptions of jurors being able to provide forensic evidence. “Using the fact that Hollywood could determine the outcome of case by letting the guilty go free, but in a society where the criminal justice system has convicted many people who was innocent.” (McRobert’s, Mills, & Possley, 2005, P. 1). Juror’s have demanded the use of forensic science for forensic evidence in criminal trials which means that prosecutors will have to provide more of the proof of juror’s to get a conviction. CSI Effect believe that crimes show such as CSI have little to no affect on juror’s actions to make a

Unfortunately, life does not always imitate art. Evidence proved that in a number of Durnal studies, that exposure to forensic science television drama series has altered the American legal system in complex and far-reaching ways. Jurors think they have a thorough understanding of science they have seen presented on television, when they do not. In a case cited by Durnal, jurors in a murder trial brought to the judge’s attention that a bloody coat introduced as evidence was not tested for DNA. The defendant admitted being present at the murder scene, so the test would not have thrown light on the identity of the true culprit. The judge stated that television is to thank for jurors knowing what DNA tests could do, but not when it was appropriate to use them. Another study revealed 62% of defense lawyers and 69% of judges agreed that jurors had unrealistic expectations of forensic evidence. Approximately half of the respondents in each category felt that jury selection was taking longer than it used to, because they had to be sure that prospective jurors were not judging scientific evidence by television standards (The CSI Effect,

In court, I observed an arraignment. An arraignment is an appearance in court to hear the charges and to make a plea. Before they appeared at their arraignment they were supposed to go through the steps of the criminal justice system. First, there was an investigation, an arrest, and booking. If the suspect was a juvenile, they would go into the juvenile justice system. Next is the prosecution; charging, initial appearance, preliminary hearing, and indictment or information. During charging, the prosecution attorneys are the link between police and the court; they must decide if there is reasonable cause to believe an offense was committed, they either are released or have an initial appearance. At the initial appearance, they are brought before a judge, given a formal notice of charges, advised of their rights, and given a chance to post bail. If not enough evidence has been produced, the judge will dismiss the case and if there is enough evidence, they will move on to a preliminary hearing. The preliminary hearing allows a judge to decide whether there is probable cause

The trial process begins with the selection of the jury. After the jury is selected the next stage is the opening statements. Since the prosecution has the burden of proof as to the defendant 's guilt, the prosecutor 's opening statement is given first. An

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)

It is true that criminal justice is a major part of the entertainment world. In most shows on TV today, I was really surprised when I sat down to think about what shows I watched that would actually fit in to the three components. I didn’t realize at first how many shows I watched that actually depicted the law enforcement, court systems, and the corrections aspects of Criminal Justice.

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 2006, over 100 million people in the United States tuned in to watch either CSI or any if the other forensic and criminal investigation related television show each week (CJSG). Since then, the number of viewers has increased rapidly, as well as the amount of television shows with the same type of theme. As a result of the increase of these television programs, researchers are discovering a new phenomenon called the ‘CSI Effect’ that seems to be fueling an interest in forensic science and criminal investigations nationwide. This effect is actually the ability of criminal justice themed television shows to influence and increase victims’, jurors’ and criminals’ ideas about forensics, DNA testing and methods, and criminal investigations

Nearly anyone you ask would be familiar with the television show CSI. The crime lab is colorful and high-tech with all of the fun toys and machines that analysts use to test the ever abundant amount of forensic evidence from every crime scene. It makes for an exciting drama that you cannot help but get immersed in—it also gives us a false illusion, however, creating what has been dubbed as the “CSI effect” (Baskin, 2011). This effect describes the idea that crime shows such as CSI generate unreal expectations, making viewers believe that forensic evidence should be existent in all criminal trials, therefore affecting their overall perspective on a case (Baskin, 2011). But in reality, forensic labs are not that glamorous. In fact, the

“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

Courtroom procedures begin before the day of the trial arrives. In a criminal case, the pre-trial proceedings vary based on the severity of the crime. With a simple misdemeanor case, which could only result in minor jail time or a fine, the pre-trial procedures are short and simple. Usually, the defendant is called to a pre-trial hearing where they are read the charges pressed against them and are asked to give either their plea of guilty and be given a sentencing date, not guilty and be given a trial date and bail amount, or to plead no contest (American Bar Association). However, in a felony case that could lead to a serious incarceration sentence, the procedure becomes more complex. There is a first hearing that is similar to that of a misdemeanor, except that a plea is not given. This is done at the second preliminary hearing to determine if there is actually enough evidence to charge the defendant with a crime. If there isn’t enough, the charges are dropped, but if there is, the case moves along in the process (American Bar Association).

My journey began with a two-week internship in the Lake County Prosecutor’s Office at the end of my senior year. After all, it was important to make sure that I love the actual job of becoming a prosecutor, and not just the idea of it. I sat in on hearings, reviewed old cases and trials, and even got the privilege of proofreading some of the motions before couriering them to the courthouse. As I had expected from the start, the job of a prosecutor was not always the most glamorous and often consisted of drowning in piles of paperwork. However, the fascinating paperwork and spending more time in courtrooms and judge’s chambers