The Court Of The Lawyer

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.

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.

The courts play a huge role in the criminal justice system. The dual court system of the United States (U.S.) was established through the U.S. constitution. The court systems have a multiple purposes and elements of court. Federal and state court system is what makes up the dual court system of the U.S. Today the U.S. court system is what it is today because of previous legal codes, common law, and the precedent it played in the past. Making the U.S. court system a vital role in the criminal justice system..

The life of every American citizen, whether they realize it or not, is influenced by one entity--the United States Supreme Court. This part of government ensures that the freedoms of the American people are protected by checking the laws that are passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President. While the judicial branch may have developed later than its counterparts, many of the powers the Supreme Court exercises required years of deliberation to perfect. In the early years of the Supreme Court, one man’s judgement influenced the powers of the court systems for years to come. John Marshall was the chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, and as the only lasting Federalist influence in a newly Democratic-Republican

Reginald Rose’s text, Twelve Angry Men, follows the jury deliberation of a small murder case, with a cast of twelve jury men discussing the evidence presented in court to decide whether the defendant is innocent or guilty. Over the course of the play, led primarily by moral compass jury number 8, the verdict is changed from eleven to one to acquittal, as the men are persuaded and subject to constant distractions, prejudice, bullying, and discussions of unreliable witness testimonies and lawyers, thus exploring issues about the validity of the justice system in magnitude.

Americans depend a great deal on entertainment to educate them about life. In several ways Americans live vicariously through the actors and actresses on television and believe themselves to learn many things from those actors and actresses. For example, many people have said they learned medical techniques by watching medical shows on television or believe they would know what to do in a medical emergency because they have seen it done on television. The same goes for Americans’ knowledge about Court hearings and the judicial system. Many things are done on television by actors playing lawyers or judges that are done just for the purpose of entertainment. “Reality-based” Court shows such as Judge Judy, People’s Court

"Honda of America Mfg., Inc. v. Norman Case Brief - Quimbee." Honda of America Mfg., Inc. v. Norman Case Brief - Quimbee. Web. 19 Oct. 2015.

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.

Crusaders in the Courts, by Jack Greenberg portrays the turbulent times in the development of the NAACP and the Legal Defense Fund. The Civil Rights movement is displayed through the personal and prolific account of the life and legal experiences of Jack Greenberg - a monumental lawyer whose actions shaped this movement and went down in history. The iconoclastic figure of Jack Greenberg was a fundamental catalyst in changing the course of history and the racism that plagued American society. This was achieved through momentous legal cases such as Brown v. Board of Education, Briggs v. Elliot, Affirmative Action cases and the Fair Housing Act of 1968. By experiencing segregation first hand, Greenberg sympathized with the struggles of black people

In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions interfere as an argumentation about the guiltlessness of a young defendant is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that suspend over the heads of the jurors are conception to lift as time advances and new facts are presented. 12 Angry Men had discussed one issue under a manner of prejudice and it was different for each juror.

A Barrister speaks in court and presents the case before a Judge and the Jury. The Barrister has to receive additional training in the evidence Law and also in court practice and procedure. The Barrister is there to show whether or not the Defendant is innocent or whether the Defendant is guilty. There are two Barristers that have to be in the court one is called a Defence Barrister and they have to make sure that their client is protected and that the client is proven innocent at the end of the trail. Then the second Barrister is called a Prosecuting Barrister whose job is to make sure that the Defendant is shown guilty at the end of the trail.

Acting as a legal practitioner is considered a “great privilege” and “offers the opportunity to serve the community in a profoundly important way.” Lawyer’s roles as officers of the Court and administrators of justice give them a monopoly on the delivery of counselling and representation services. In order to “maintain their capacity to serve the community” , legal practitioners must accept that they are

Therapeutic Jurisprudence is the study of how aspects of legal system impacts the mental wellness.The implications of law on mental health is an ignored part of law. The research deals with the core idea of therapeutic jurisprudence and how it effects people placing reliance on various laws and legal practices prevalent in the legal system.In 1987, David Wexler conveyed a paper to the National Institute of Mental Health in the United States coining the term “Therapeutic Jurisprudence”.Therapeutic jurisprudence is the “study of the role of the law as a therapeutic agent”. Therapeutic Jurisprudence proposed that psychiatry, and extensive controls of the sociologies had significant depths of knowledge to offer to the field of law and psychological wellness and that the law and the legal system ought to endeavour to utilize the knowledge where appropriate. Therapeutic Jurisprudence is an interdisciplinary way to deal with the study and routine of law and focuses on the regularly undervalued part of the law and lawful performing artists' part in delivering helpful or anti-therapeutic results. It is a regulating structure that backers the utilization of the sociologies to illuminate the procedures and results of lawful communications and techniques. Therapeutic Jurisprudence impacts the procedures of the court and inclinations an extended rehabilitative part for criminal attorneys. Therapeutic Jurisprudence likewise impacts the way attorneys

There are many different reasons a person can find themselves in a court as the defendant.

The first step in the long road to recovery for a lawyer is to first confide in others their plight, thus nourishing a sense of group synergy that can carry them out of an alcoholic abyss. This group synergy comes in the form of a Lawyer Assistance Program (LAP). With its main tagline being, “Created by lawyers for lawyers,” a LAP functions as both a confidential hotline and a support group. There, trained experts offer heartfelt counseling to lawyers losing a case against alcoholism, addiction, depression, stress, and other mental health issues. Operating on a 24-hour hotline, the LAP is the perfect third party between the lawyer and the liquor bottle. It should also be the premier answer to lawyers battling a potential death sentence by