Pros And Cons Of Televised Trial

The right to a speedy trial is considered an essential part of the due process applicable against the states because of the decision in the case of Klopfer v. North Carolina (1967) and ultimately the inclusion of it within the fourteenth amendment, that was granted by the doctrine of selective incorporation. In this particular case, the defendant Klopfer appealed to the supreme court because his trial had been postponed to be brought up again in the future when desired. Klopfer claimed that the right to a speedy trial, granted by the Sixth Amendment, should be pertinent to a state’s criminal prosecution due to the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Ingram, 2009). The case was examined by the supreme court who ruled that the right to a speedy trial is a crucial basic right, just as the other rights guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment, that has been around for a very long time (Steinberg, 1975).

Camera footage is a very important aspect of the Criminal Justice system because it plays a big role in how the case plays out. In Canadian courts, cameras are generally not allowed, whereas in the American court it is aloud (How the Canadian Legal System Differs from the American). Cameras in the courtroom, most importantly television cameras can negatively affect a courtroom in

In the article " Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors' Demands for Visual Evidence" by Sylvia Hsiech, visual evidence can be used very effectively to reach jurors in courtrooms cases, but such evidence must adhere to the rules of evidence and should not be overdone. According to the author, There is a high demand for lawyers to use sound bite-like presentation and hiring visual artists to illustrate piles of documents and basically bringing them to life. For example hiring an visual artist you can keep the jurors entertained and present it visual so they can see and understand it. In the article, the author talks about Brain Carney because according to him every case can be visual. For instance whether you think your case can't be transfer into a

Across the country a growing number of legislative departments have been debating about the pros and cons of police body cameras. This paper will further explore benefits, as well as the downfalls of using such devices. This paper will also look at specific cases and examine whether or not body cameras were helpful in various situations. It will examine if they were a deterrent in cases dealing with police brutality and domestic violence. It also looks at how they could be misused and assisting some officers in covering up their corrupt behavior.

In America’s justice system, a grand jury is a group of citizens called to decide whether probable cause exists to believe that a suspect committed the crime with which she or he has been charged (Gaines G-4). In the Central District of California, prospective jurors who report and are not excused or postponed, the Jury Clerk will use a computer program to randomly select 23 members and ten alternates for each grand jury. A grand jury designated “investigatory” meet for a 12-month term, while a grand jury designated “accusatory” meets for a 6-month term. A grand jury has 23 members and meets once a week, always on the same weekday. Grand juries do not meet on weekends or Mondays. The average workday is 5 hours. Absences for medical appointments, vacations, graduations, etc. may be accommodated, but 16 members must be present for the grand jury to conduct business. The grand jury serves the United States District Court, Central District of California. In contrast, a trial jury is asked to reach a verdict based on the evidence presented during a civil or criminal trial; a grand jury meets in secret to consider whether there is sufficient evidence to justify a formal criminal charge against someone. That formal criminal charge is called an “indictment” (Central).

The right to fair trial consists of rights of criminal defendants, including the “right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you” (Cornel-six). This rights have been violated times near courthouses concerning ICE arrests. In OPB, Thomas Balmer, an Oregon Supreme Court Justice said that ICE arrests were a “strong deterrent for people trying to access the criminal justice system” (OPB letter). One of the rights guaranteed in the 6th amendment is the right to a public trial. However, one cannot have a fair, public trial if one cannot access a courthouse out of fear of the government. This would lead to more cases gone unanswered which would lead to a less stable justice system. Balmer also added that “Arrests could keep witnesses to crimes from testifying in court or victims of domestic violence from seeking a restraining order” (OPB letter). This example also goes against the right to a speedy public trial. In fear of ICE, both immigrants and nonimmigrants will stay quiet and will not testify or seek the rights promised to them. And the government, by rule of laws, have to obey the law along with the common people. However, by restricting people from accessing courthouses, they are going against the constitution itself and therefore is

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

While the media attention has been focused on using body cameras, their role in court cases and influencing verdicts remains to be seen. With an unknown impact on trials, it is important for people charged with crimes to hire an attorney who understands the limitations of police body cameras. A lawyer familiar with body cameras will be able to point to holes in the efficacy of body cameras and offer the strongest criminal defense

Throughout one’s life many are prone to being in one of America’s many courtrooms at least once in their life. Whether it is for a parking ticket, a petty larceny charge, or simply jury duty most citizens have been in a courtroom once or twice. However, it is rare that one knows the many steps and processes that take place when a crime has been convicted. There is an excess number of elements that are introduced and just to name a few it all starts with the occurrence of the crime, then follows the arrest, proceeded by an arraignment, bail hearing and any more steps before finally reaching the final verdict that lands one with guilt or innocence (Neubrauer, Fadella 2013). Based on the laws in place by the United States and the Constitution one must be able to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is doubt at all in the jurors minds, they cannot convict the individual of being guilty and lately this has created a lot of controversy in the United States with many cases being tried. For example, the Casey Anthony case that took place in Florida was one of the most recent states where Common Law and the Constitution were unable to be reconcilable to prove one’s guilt.

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)

The Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments to the Constitution have wording relating to trials in America. They sought to protect the “people” from an overreaching government and to ensure certain rights to all citizens. The Sixth Amendment states that, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…” (U.S. Const. amend VI)

The proponents of cameras in the courtroom also believe that televised trials would educate the public on courtroom procedure and rules of the court. The media believes that as the viewers watch real trials on television, they would become more aware of the rules of the court and they would become more aware of the basic procedures courts have to follow. An example of how cameras in the courtroom would educate the public would be the all famous O.J. Simpson trial. The O.J. Simpson trial educated the public on rules of evidence with the “bloody glove” display, the cross-examination of key witnesses with the examination of Mark Furman, and what role the judge plays in the process. The media believes that if cameras where not allowed inside O.J. Simpson trial, then the public for the most part would still not understand the true workings of the court system. Kimberlianne Podlas note that televised trials will educate the public by giving them a reference for what the court system is, “its fairness, and who the arbiters of justice are” (Podlas, 2001). Podlas also explains that the O.J. Simpson trial lead more people to watch and gain a understanding and respect for the judicial system as well as gaining knowledge of the legal concepts and burdens of the system (Podlas, 2001).

In the Australian legal system, juries have been the subject of debate for many years. Should we have them for criminal trials or will justice be done better through trial by judge alone?

Some Jurors will reach a quick verdict or not properly think over the evidence just to get it over and done with so they can go home.

The idea of law and order in this country isn’t a new one and, in fact, has taken a very long time to get to the point it is today. But it isn’t done changing or improving because with every new advancement and technology law must adapt to encompass these new gray areas and make them clear in the court of law. An example of a few large milestones in United States’ law that reflect such adaptability are the Federal Rules of Evidence; Federal Rules for Civil Procedure; and the Sedona Conference. Each of these milestones have made clear many issues and gray areas in the law. Issues in evidence collection and presenting as well as digital evidence collection are a few of the many subjects covered in these federal rules.