The Evolution of Electronic Court Coverage Essay

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.

It was a gloomy Tuesday morning in Camden on March 18, 2014. Spring break had just began and the free time to do the court observation. The Superior Court of New Jersey had begun a civil action court case that was fairly controversial over how to distribute ones pension to their spouse when filing a divorce. When arriving upon the court house, the whole entire environment surrounding the court was very authoritarian. It seems that the court rooms and such are always located where most of the town’s governing takes place, whether it is just a municipal court, or the superior court just as this one. Before arriving, the presumption was that the court house would like every other court house, big building with large marble stone pillars in

The courts play a vital role in the criminal justice system. It provides a forum for laws to be upheld and offers victims justice for crimes committed against them (Siegel, et al., 2011). Furthermore, the role of the court is to impose rulings in a way that is fair and unbiased. While it may be challenging, judges must strive to be impartial and reach decisions based on what the law stipulates. They must also fulfill their role in the criminal justice system by issuing rulings despite the weight of public opinion.

The book Courtroom 302, written by Steve Bogira in 2005, is about the criminal courts in Chicago, IL. Steve Bogira graduated from Northwestern University, and is an excellent reporter for the Chicago Review. Courtroom 302 is story told mainly from through Steve Bogira’s observations. Bogira observes a courtroom (Courtroom 302), and basically the entire justice system process from beginning to end. The courtroom that Bogira observes is in the control of Judge Daniel Locallo. Judge Locallo helps give Bogira an all access view, plus vital personal thoughts and feelings about issues and events that he has dealt with; and Bogira has observed. Judge Locallo is not the only person that expresses personal information. Many employees of the

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)

532 (1965), many potential pitfalls of televised proceedings are listed, including: “(1) the possibility that televising the proceedings will have a ‘direct bearing on (a juror’s) vote as to guilt or innocence’, (2) the possibility that jurors will be ‘preoccupied with the telecasting rather than with the testimony’, (3) the possibility that jurors will be influenced by television broadcasts of the proceedings or subjected to commentary or criticism from members of the public, (4) the difficulty of obtaining an unbiased venire if a retrial is required in a case where the first trial was televised….”

“Why Eye Witnesses Get it Wrong,” a speech by Dr. Scott Fraser explains the different aspects of the criminal trial process. More importantly, it explains the use of eyewitness testimony and its consequences on trial outcomes, and in this case a criminal trial and its portrayal of a wrongly convicted man. The presentation uses all three tools of persuasive argument ethos, pathos, and logos to appeal to the audience and explains each in their own way. However, the argument tends to sway the audience towards respecting reason and information over being emotional or pathos driven.

In the essay, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors Demands for Visual Evidence,” by Sylvia Hsieh, elicits the symbiotic relationship between trial attorneys and the technological developments used in the court room. He illustrates, how these technical improvements impact the demands and perception of jurors. He also expresses they are reasonably priced, yet faces evidentiary challenges. He engenders the cause and ramifications of technology utilized in the court of law with its added benefits while concluding its pitfalls.

Through immense analyzing of sociological studies, it is determined that the increasing prevalence of social media and internet threatens jurors’ ability to remain impartial, therefore impeaching an individual’s right to a fair trial. Despite this, juries should not be abolished in all criminal trials, but perhaps a compromise can be achieved. Juries are groups of 12 - 18 people who are randomly chosen to decide whether or not the accused, in a criminal trial, is either guilty or not guilty.

It has also been suggested that judges could use video conferencing facilities from a different location in order to deal with a civil dispute rather than be physically present. This is not without its’ own set of challenges . It is implied that a party in a trial has the right to see a judge “struggling conscientiously with the detail of a case ” which is a “feature of the court system that cannot be discarded ”. In trying to minimise the physical aspect of the judge’s role in court seems to undermine the basic fundamental human rights mentioned in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states that parties in a trial are entitled to a “fair and public hearing...” . This is because it seeks to reinforce the aspect of the courts moving towards a more ‘impersonal ’ and ‘nonhuman ’ approach to dealing with civil disputes.

The main players inside the courtroom will be presented through this article by underscoring some cases influenced by these people. The main players in the courtroom are the prosecutor, the defense lawyer and the judge. This article will also use the due process control model and the crime control model in evaluating the judicial process. The standards set by Strickland v. Washington will also be clarified by describing it and its effect on courtroom cases.

On observing the District Court a number of distinctions from the Local Courts were immediately made apparent. Without going in to detail about the actual structure of the courts, they seemed to fit more closely with the traditional schema of a typical courtroom. In particular the larger courtrooms with more facilities combined with the barristers and magistrates wearing their wig and robes seemed to instantly uphold the ideology of justice. It is interesting to note how appearances can automatically provide an impression that justice will be upheld. The

For Zimmerman’s case, the Jurors had an adequate understanding of the law and made the right decision to acquit him of murder. The media already branded him a murderer even before trial, but the Jurors managed to play their role as expected. Richard (2014) indicates that the media controls great influence in the society. In most cases, they help determine what topics to talk about and the direction of the topic. That is why in the crimes with widespread media coverage, the jurors, prosecutors and defendants face difficult challenges. The Jurors may develop some bias towards the victims and judge the defendants guilty in a case

During the eighteenth century the criminal trial was far from sound. The trails lasted on average half an hour, including the jury’s deliberation and an announcement of their verdict. These criminal trials differ substantially from our modern legal system, there was often minimal evidence provided, often presented orally and the judge’s intention was to present defendants with the evidence they would have to counter to maintain their innocence, rather than the modern age philosophy of proving one’s quilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, this system provided the upper classes of society an advantage because they held the means to hire qualified and reputable lawyers to defend them in court, whereas those of the working class had to represent

Whether it is a criminal trial or a complex civil litigation case, lawyers typically do not leave the chance of a high-profile case or a case with high-stakes up to chance. Rather, lawyers rely on jury consultants who help them to research and select jurors by providing attorneys with insight on common juror behavior (Kane, 2017). Some consultants focus on jury selection, others may spend time working with the witnesses, while others focus on developing an effective trial strategy (Stapp, 2017). Developing an effective trial strategy may encompass considering things that shape juror’s perceptions during voir dire and opening statements, or how the presentation of the evidence and closing argument may lead to a verdict that is favorable for