This essay will consider at the various advantages and disadvantages of the Jury within the context of the legal system. It will start by highlighting the role of the jury in a trial, of whom they are comprised, and how the system works. It will then go on to analyse on the advantages and disadvantages of the system, including illustrative evidence both supporting and opposing the jury system. Following this there will be a short summary, highlighting the main points of this essay and then a conclusion. A jury can be defined as a group of people (usually 12 in number) who have been selected to consider the issues of fact in a trail in a Court of Law, in order to make a finding as to an individual’s guilt or lack thereof to a standard which is either “beyond reasonable doubt” or “on the balance of probabilities”.
Upon review of the provision and the client’s case it was clear that there were terms that were specific and others that were rather confusing. In order to better understand Jerry Brown’s situation research was conducted as our second step. Words phrases such as “surviving partner”, “death of a partner”, “partnership agreement”, and “partnership dissolution” were used in the RIA database. Various search results were brought up but those that helped us make our conclusion can be narrowed down the court case and several rulings which are referenced
Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based on their sides of the story. The individual with the best argument and delivery would determine the outcome of the case. This origin is the source of the two modern usages of the word forensic – as a form of legal evidence and as a category of public presentation. In modern use, the term "forensics" in the place of "forensic science" can be considered correct as the term "forensic" is effectively a synonym for "legal" or "related to courts". However the term is now so closely associated with the scientific field that many dictionaries include the meaning that equates the word "forensics" with "forensic science".
This essay will evaluate how a psychologist and a member of the public might each reach conclusions or form matters of opinion of which they ‘feel certain’ and how the meanings attached to what they ‘know’ might be different. Introduction 3: This essay will aim to draw comparisons between the way in which Psychologists gain knowledge and the methods which are used to gain knowledge by the general, or lay, public. The essay will begin by detailing the methods used by psychologists for knowledge acquisition, known as the scientific method, followed by the various methods of belief fixation used by the lay public, such as tenacity, authority and pure reason. It will then go on to make detailed comparisons
This record helps to remind all those involved in a case what has been said in court, so that the case can be decided based on a text that can be reviewed. Q: How are records of testimony made? A: There are three methods of preserving testimony in depositions or at a trial: (1) a stenographic reporter may take down the words by pressing levers on a machine; (2) an attendant reporter may be present to oversee an electronic system (and sometimes a video camera) to record spoken words; or (3) an electronic recording may be made without direct human involvement or intervention. All three systems record the words of testimony, but vary in cost and usefulness. All criminal cases are attended by a court reporter, but a court reporter is required in civil hearings only if a party asks for one.
Data was collected for three courts including Common Pleas Court, Domestic Relations Court, and the Municipal Court. From the data collected, several different probabilities can be calculated, and conclusions can be made. Results “The relative frequency method of assigning probabilities is appropriate when data are available to estimate the proportion of the time the experimental outcome will occur if the experiment is repeated a large number of times” (Anderson et al., 2012, p.156). This student calculated the relative frequencies using several different sets of data to equal the probabilities of the events occurring. The first calculation found was the probability of cases being appealed and reversed in the three different courts.
Human experience must result in the formulation of different viewpoints. Two or more people will necessarily form different opinions on the same event or person. How true is this? Human experiences shapes and may decide an individual’s thoughts and opinions on a particular issue or person, though this does not mean that every person has a different judgement concerning an event or a person. In “The Justice Game” by Geoffrey Robertson, a Queen’s counsel barrister, displays through many chapters within the novel of differing perspectives to people and events such as an interview with Andrew Denton, on the TV show Enough Rope episode 92 which focuses on events from Robertson’s book such as Trials of Oz and Michael X on death Row, from the “Justice Game” the related material of the Roman in Britain from The Guardian, Friday 28 October 2005 “Passion play-Mary Whitehouse”.
Step 1 Open your introduction with a statement related to the human or social problem your qualitative research study investigates. Some reports employ attention-grabbing, rhetorical methods for opening the report, such as a provocative quotation, a startling statistic or an amusing or profound anecdote. Other reports simply address the problem explicitly, opening with a statement along the lines of, “this report investigates” or “this reports seeks to know.” Step 2 Outline the investigative methods you employed in gathering the data in your report. Distinguish between quantitative methods, such as surveys and physiological testing, and qualitative methods, such as interviews and analyses of surveys. Step 3 Explain any and all conclusions you anticipated reaching as well as a general overview of the conclusions you were able to reach.
Research Paper #1 The articles assigned were both extremely informative, interesting, and discussed a [perhaps controversial] subject matter pertinent to our justice system. Each article focused its discussion of studies conducted regarding judges’ decisions to release offenders before trial, if or how the offenders’ race and/or ethnicity effected judges’ decisions regarding pretrial detention, and the effect of pretrial detention on subsequent and future sentence lengths. Additionally discussed in each article, though briefly, were the extra legal factors which influenced pretrial detention: offenders’ status in their communities (i.e. employment, marriage status), prior criminal records, offenders’ education level, and judges’ perceived
[2] Indeed, this seemingly plainly written text is much more than just a narrative piece of work due to its inherent influence at the sentencing stage. There exists an inherent tension between the two schools of thoughts: one view among the legal academy is that such statements are no more than some maneuver to elongate criminals’ sentences or even encourage votes for death penalty in some extreme cases by evoking unnecessary emotionalism, while some argue that they undeniably convey essential information to sentencing judges and possess other advantageous effects. A literary analysis of a victim impact statement thus becomes essential – exploring the camouflaged narrative techniques as employed to explain their role in court. In this essay, I shall discuss the narrative dimension of victim impact statements in light of Booth v Maryland, followed by an analysis of whether the court should admit such statements in the sentencing phase of cases. II.