The Elements Of The Adversarial Trial System

The parties or their attorneys have an opportunity to explain their view of the dispute.

Who is the decision-maker in the case (you are supposed to identify with) and what position, title and responsibilities do they hold?

established by the jury. Civil actions do allow juries in some instances, but many civil cases will

Disputes between individuals can be resolved through mediation, tribunals and courts are sought depending on the complexity and nature of the dispute. Their effectiveness in achieving justice for and between individuals to varying extents will be assessed by their ability to uphold notions of fairness, equality, access, timeliness, enforceability and resource efficiency.

Justice is the concept of moral rightness that is based on equality, access and fairness. This means that the law is applied equally, understood by all people and does not have a particularly harsh effect on an individual. In Australia, the adversary system is used as a means to achieve justice by proving the accused, beyond reasonable doubt, committed the crime. The criminal trial process has many features which aim to fulfill the requirements of achieving justice. These elements, though considers equality, fairness and access, are flawed in practice. Flaws such as the handling of evidence, jurors not understanding instructions, inadequate funds for legal

Before going to trial, the parties meet, with their attorneys to represent them, to try to resolve their dis­pute without the involvement of a third party. This is

In America we have an Adversary System of Justice, which means that criminal trials proceed under the adversary theory of justice to arrive at the truth in a given case. One characteristic of this system is intensive cross-examination of both defense and prosecution witnesses. In a jury trial, it is for the jury, which observes these witnesses, to weigh the evidence and make the ultimate decision in every case—guilty or not guilty. However, not every case makes it to trial in fact, about 80% of defendants plead guilty allowing them to just be sentenced and not have to go through the whole process of a trial. Other cases are dropped, or dismissed if the prosecutor, or in some cases a grand jury, feels that there is insufficient evidence to carry on. Some defendants are sent to diversion programs, these individuals are often sent here because an official involved in the case believes that there is a better way to deal with a defendant than to prosecute them.

The adversarial nature of the Australian court system is fundamentally implemented to ensure a fair and impartial trial for members of the public, yet this is not always the case. Access to justice, and the courts themselves, are often perceived quite variably depending on an individual’s experience with such institutions. In particular, it is often the disadvantaged in our society, such as those from low socio-economic backgrounds, youth and Indigenous Australians, who are the most neglected and disheartened by fair access to the court systems. However, this is not to say that the system specifically works in favor of educated, white individuals. The systematic approach to court processes, consisting of the apparent impartiality of judges and trials by jury, often impede the natural course of justice and do not allow for a fair and unbiased trial.

in which this decision is made. In some jurisdictions, the cases may be decided upon

The courtroom is a vital part of the criminal justice system, and a major role in the judicial branch of our government. In the courtroom there are specified roles given to certain people that allow them to to actively engage in the system and get it to work efficiently and properly so that justice is served. The major roles of the courtroom work group are: Police officer, prosecutor, defense attorney, judge, defendant, victim, bailiff, court reporter, and the jury. In this essay I will describe in depth the responsibilities of each of these important courtroom characters.

A legal adviser in the court gives advice on the law and makes sure the magistrates follow the right procedures.

The adversarial system has many great aspects which makes it the desirable system. In an adversarial system, the police and defence are responsible for gathering evidence, and an evaluation of that evidence is done by an unbiased judge. Judges play a role like a referee at a sporting event and the prosecutor and defence counsel are the athletes. They watch the game and blow the whistle when they see unfair gameplay. Canada and the United States have an adversarial justice system. This depicts how first world countries use an adversarial system over an inquisitorial system because they recognize that it is superior in that it is a fairer justice system. In an

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

The parties for the inquisitorial system are required to respond to the directors of the court (pg,30, Legal studies student booklet). In the adversary system, the parties get more control, which therefore shows that the

The development of specific rules of evidence from the 18th. century onwards were much influenced by the jury system of trial. Concerns with the ability of lay juries to evaluate and assimilate various data led to safeguards being introduced The perceived need within the current adversarial system for such “rules” has, as