The 's Scales Of Justice : Defense Counsel And The English Criminal Trial Essay

The complexity of the United States legal system reflects the diversity of the public it serves. Over centuries of immigration different cultures have brought old world legal customs that eventually intermixed to become the legal system under which the country now operates. While much of the influence in Law can be credited to the British Common Law system there are some defining characteristics, which are uniquely American. One of these is public prosecution, which originated in 1704 in Connecticut and was later adopted by the other colonies and, after the Revolution, the States. (Jacoby 3) These practices lead to the development of district attorneys, though this was not their original title. A district attorney is the criminal

A notable tension that was written about in this document was the cruel and harsh treatment of the accused by the justices. Cary relays that his wife’s treatment was inhumane, physically abusive and demeaning. During testimony, she was asked to stand for a long period with her arms stretched out. Cary’s wife was crying and afraid that she might faint. When Cary asked if he could help support her, “Justice Hathorne replied, she had strength enough to torment those persons, and she should have strength enough to stand.” When Cary spoke out against this treatment, he was told to be silent or that he would be removed from the room. Cary’s wife was later taken down on the floor by one of the witnesses. Cary spoke out on “their inhumane dealings, uttered a hasty speech (that God would take vengeance on them, and desired that God would deliver us out of the hands of unmerciful men)”.

Pass 4- Describe the role of lay people in criminal cases and Distinction 1- Evaluate the effectiveness of lay people in the English courts

The role of the judge in the adversary system of trial, unlike the inquisitorial counterpart, has less involvement in the establishment of facts and the analysis of evidence in cases brought before the court. In the inquisitorial system of trial, the judge has a much more active role in relation to the handling and evaluation of evidence, and where relevant, can actually cross examine and question witnesses if they feel crucial evidence may have been missed. While the inquisitorial system of trial has a seemingly more intrusive judge, having an added legal expert questioning and raising areas where evidence may have been missed, is a significant improvement over a judge who may know evidence has been missed but cannot intervene such is the

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.

Merit –compare and contrast the role of judges ,lawyers and lay people within the English courts.

Till the nineteenth century the greater part of the criminal cases were discarded by jury trial. A supplication of nolo contendere in offense cases permitted the litigant to submit to conviction without confessing to blame. However nolo contendere supplications were not permitted in genuine crime cases. Until the recent 50% of the nineteenth century, both in the United States and the United Kingdom, blameworthy supplications as legitimate procedural instruments were utilized just seldom and verbosely.

The criminal trial process has many aspects which aim to balance the rights of victims, offenders and society, including plea bargains and charge negotiations, the ability of defendants to hire legal representation and complete and partial defences. However, these processes do not always succeed in completely achieving justice for victims, offenders and society.

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

Magna Cara is acclaimed as introducing the notion of trial by peers. The notion of jury trials dates right back to the creation of Magna Carta in 1215 by King John, and has developed enormously over time. Successful generations have seen a historical 800 years of development within the jury trial system. Significant markings such as the Fourth Lateran Council, the passing of Australian legislation and global documents that reflect the origins of Magna Carta, show the strong impact Magna Carta had on the development of trial by jury. Trial by jury is now seen as one of the most valued and highly respected concepts with the Australian legal system. It’s current process reflects a democracy and justice. It has allowed for the protection of individual

Plea bargaining is considered to be the least documented element in the criminal justice system but can be documented as early as 1431 when Joan of Arc was given the opportunity to save her own life if she recanted her story of hearing Saints sent by God to free France from England (Meyer & Grant, 2003). Plea bargains have been perceived differently by those in the justice system and society. Those in the justice system see plea bargains as a way to elevate the work load and frees up the court rooms. Societies misconceptions are that plea bargains are an easy way out for criminals, and the criminals are getting away with the crimes they have committed. The reality is that plea bargains are offered based on a person’s criminal history, the type of crime committed, and how their plea bargain can help in the outcome of the case. Some would argue that it violates the defendants right but truth is when accepting a plea it requires, “defendants to waive three rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments: the right to a jury trial, the

Law in the middle Ages was ambiguous, oaths, ordeals and ‘Judgments of God’ were considered to be equivalent to law. There was no formal hierarchy of courts or assemblies, disputes were often settled by collective judgement lead by a group of men from the highest status in the community. The legal disputes in both sources reflect the unprofessional law in medieval Europe.

Discovering and comparing the advantages and limitations of both the English adversarial and French inquisitorial systems of trial is the main focus of this essay, with some discussion as to the implications these have on justice. To accomplish this a review of relevant literature was conducted focussing on each systems use of juries, judges, pleas, use of evidence and role of each party (prosecution and defence). The main points brought up by this literature were that both systems have issue with jury bias, plea bargaining is a far larger issue in England than in France, the role of the judge varies greatly between each system with the English being an impartial third party and the French being in charge of decisions such as guilty verdicts. As well as discussing the important point of admissible and inadmissible evidence within both court systems. From the review of the advantages and

Inherent jurisdiction was originally vested in the English superior courts of the common law and it has developed in two methodologies. Regarding the first path, the superior courts had the power to determine punishment for offenders who had not abided by the orders of court and its process. This power derived primarily from the practice of the Star Chamber and it was upheld by the common law judges in 1641. In the second path, the superior courts had the power ‘from the earliest times’ to stipulate their procedures and ‘prevent the abuse of its process’ caused by ‘vexatious

This essay will be looking at the advantages and disadvantages of the jury trial. Jury trial is a legal proceeding where a jury makes a decision, which then direct the actions of a judge. The members of a jury are a group of independent citizens. They have no interest in the case before them, nor is their judgment coloured by regular experience of the business of the court. They are “twelve individuals, often with no prior contact with the courts, who are chosen at random to listen to evidence and decide upon matters affecting the reputation and liberty of those charged with criminal offences.” The jury has always been drawn from sections of society but has been made democratic only in the last half century. And now almost all citizen of the United Kingdom are eligible to serve on a jury. But the percentage of criminal cases actually tried by jury is surprisingly low. Nowadays “the magistrates’ courts deal with at least 95 per cent of criminal cases. In practice juries determine the outcome of less than 1 per cent of the total of the criminal cases.” But still the idea of trial by jury has always been seen as a “cornerstone of the English legal system” , and it remains the standard mode of trial for dealing with the most serious types of criminal case. But even though it is established and been in practice for years, people seem to believe that there are disadvantages to jury trails. Nonetheless, the jury system is becoming increasingly controversial. Critics claim that