Voir Dire

Madison is a landmark Supreme Court case. Marbury v. Madison is one of the most influential and groundbreaking legal proceeding in the history of the United States. The Marbury v. Madison case was the first of its kind. Prior to Marbury vs. Madison, it was unclear whether the U.S. Supreme Court had the power to determine the constitutionality of laws or what should happen when the Constitution and a law were in conflict. “Consequently the theory of every such government must be that an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void.” With these words written by Chief Justice Marshall, this case is significant because for the first time, the Supreme Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional because it was contrary to the Constitution. This decision was the foundation for the Supreme Court's power of "judicial review," the power by which the Court could determine the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress. Marshall stated in the majority opinion “Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.” Marshall is saying that the Judicial has the decision on the two opposing laws and thus creating Judicial Review. Nothing in the Constitution gave the Court this specific power. Marshall, however, believed that the

As a member of the first Congress, Madison helped to create and introduced “the Bill of Rights, restricting the power of the federal government and safeguarding individual liberties. The Billl of Rights became a cornerstone of American culture, as revered as the original Constitution itself.” Madison believed that liberty and freedom were the greatest gifts the United States Constitution gave the people and in this case the people were deprived from those given rights. In this era people faced corruption, the corporations took their liberties away they were left with nothing but hope for a better future. If Madison would have seen this era he would have been ashamed of the way people act to be and remain in

Your honor, I respectfully request that you find the defendant, Jamie Hayes, guilty of voluntary manslaughter. As you can see from our witness’s testimony, we have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that Jamie Hayes, is indeed guilty of manslaughter. Our first witness, Lou Williams, head of campus security, explained the specific details of every incident involving the track team and campus security. Alongside this, Lou Williams also told us that the security department was well trained and prepared for any incident that was to occur. All security officers were licensed to carry firearms and to use them if necessary. Furthermore, she stated that they hired Lee Valdez based off his respectable credentials and that he was a great officer to work with. During Valdez’s time, recent events involving police brutality raised some serious concerns amongst many of the students at CCU. Since then, the students have held two rallies on excessive use of force by law enforcement, and with this, the security department has noticed a change in the students’ attitudes towards authority. In response to this, Lou Williams conducted monthly training meetings with her staff on how to deescalate tense situations. Despite what defense may say otherwise, Campus Security did have a procedure that was followed on the night of the incident on May 15, 2014.

The fact that the court has tried this officer will continue to warrant safer staff and safer schools. Most students would agree that some staff at their school gets out of hand but this case can keep the staff on their toes about how they handle students. The students are at school to feel safe and learn, and with these actions students would be scared to say anything. Students are that environment to learn from their mistakes and if their mistakes are warrant for arrest why would kids ever want to go to school? Especially for kids with disabilities or special needs, that’s a lot to handle and take on at such a young age and the officers at school need to be aware of student with those

Courts play a vital role in the Criminal Justice System in America, however; understanding how the courts work and function is essential. Even the general public should have a basic knowledge regarding the similarities and differences of the jurisdiction and structure of our dual court system – federal and state. In addition, there are ethical and diversity issues that can be experienced by each of the courts that could possibly impact the courts’ functioning.

The jury selection process is a significant portion of the trial process. Jury selection ensures that courts maintain proper Due Process and comply with constitutional guidelines. Furthermore, it gives lawyers the ability to evaluate the people in the jury and determine how they would feel about the case. The trial process branches out into six steps: jury selection, opening statements, presentation of evidence, closing arguments, charging of the jury and deliberation of jury. Throughout the process of jury selection, potential jury is based on a process names an voir dire; otherwise known as committing to telling the truth. During voir dire, potential jurors are included in

It is the right of every citizen in this nation to have his or her case decided by a fair and impartial jury. The selection of the jury panel is one of great importance and one that can have a great effect on the outcome of the case. Therefore, it is obvious that the attorneys have a

One of the most intricate processes in the criminal justice system is the jury selection process. During this process members of a trial are asked various questions by the prosecution and defense attorneys handling the case at hand. Along with these questions the jury uses three main challenges, also known as voir dire, to insure the selection is not leaning in favor of a certain community or racially biased; challenges to the array, challenges for the cause, and peremptory challenges (Rennison & Dodge 2017) all of which I will discuss in the proceeding paragraphs.

A trial by jury or jury trial is a legal proceeding where a jury either makes a finding of a fact or a decision, which then direct the actions of the judge. It is different from a bench trial where a panel of judges makes all decisions. It consists of five steps: the selection of the jury, the trial, the charge of the magistrate, deliberation and then the verdict. The choice of the jury is the first and crucial step.

In spite of the fact that the definition of jury tampering is rather basic, and the thought of it happening in a case is trivial, it is somewhat a common occurrence despite jurors expecting to remain impartial and unbiased in their decision making (Fordham, 2010). There are a range of factors that can lead to jury tampering, the most recognizable is being pressured to vote a

In the courtroom, the jury acts as the last chance that the defendant has to try to secure his or her freedom. Depending on their final verdict, the life of another human being is decided. Any jury, though, can only be as good as the jurors that make up the panel. This fact is very clearly illustrated in Twelve Angry Men, where a couple of bad seeds almost end up making a premature decision based on purely arbitrary reasons that would retuen to haunt them. Clearly, mixed in with those truly cared about whether or not the suspect that was accused actually got a fair trial, there were also those on the other end of the spectrum who honestly could not have cared less.

Juries form an important part of our legal system and are made up of ordinary people from our community. A jury trial is a legal proceeding in which a jury, made up of twelve individuals, makes a decision that then directs the actions of a judge. A jury is randomly chosen from a list of voter registrations and driver licence ID renewals. Once the jury is chosen they participate in both criminal trials and civil trials. In criminal trials the jury hears evidence and makes a decision as to whether the person is guilty or innocent. Civil trials that need juries are usually defamation proceedings. But are twelve heads better than one? During this report, I will critically analyse and evaluate the two conflicting viewpoints contained in the

The jury system has been used for thousands of years to fairly determine innocence or guilt in a trial. Although not utilized as much as in the past it is still used for most criminal and some civil cases. This leads to an unjust legal system full of bias. The jury system was first seen in use by the ancient Greeks thousands of years ago[1]. Though the system was the fairest way to produce a verdict, it cannot apply today because society has endured a change which taints the foundation of a fair trial by jury. Juries are much more open to tampering by interested parties through which can be undetected by the

Voir dire is not designed to educate jurors, but to enable parties to select an impartial panel. Questions should only test the jurors capacity and competency; without instilling prejudicial issues into their minds. Trial judges set questioning limitations and standards. The voir dire process is important because any case in which a juror is biased can cause the case to be dismissed. Another option available is to replace the affected juror [1].

Walter (2002) has mentioned that fallibility of witness is an important issue in the American justice system. Honesty of eyewitnesses during the trial is an important issue that has concerned most in the American justice system. In the presence of a testimony from an eye witness, jury can judge better as greater impact of an eye witness is seen on the jury members. Ziskin, Faust and Anderer (2011) have mentioned that the main responsibility of the jury members is the sorting out of credibility issues and judging the level of truth presented by the witnesses. Perjury is thought to be a crime as if a witness can lie in the witness stand; it can have negative effects on the judgments of the jury, on the dignity held by the trial, and legitimacy of the judicial systems in America.