During the Dred Scott versus Sandford case, Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert B. Taney’s rulings were justifiable for the time being, despite the fact that many people disagreed with his decision. Taney’s decision in the Dred Scott versus Sandford case was appropriate because he had to abide by sections of the Constitution such as the first clause of the 2nd section of the Third Amendment when coming to the decision on whether Dred Scott had the right to file a suit. Taney’s obligation to abide by the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment also forced him to make certain decisions within the case despite what his, or anyone else’s, feelings were. A third part of the Constitution that justified Taney’s ruling was the Property Clause in Article four of the Constitution. The Dred Scott versus Sandford case resulted in a 7-2 vote in favor of Sandford, but because of the controversy this case brought, Taney had to make sure his rulings were fit.
This is a pivotal part in terms of maintain the functioning of society and to ensure that people don’t go around breaking laws wherever and whenever they want. The criminal justice system is therefore a central part of society and without is society would quickly deteriorate into chaos. There are however a number of issues in the criminal justice system. Some of these issues include false convictions and bias within the courtroom. The tutorial discussion this week was essentially discussing how the system operates and some of the flaws within the system such as false convictions which come about through human error or in extreme cases racial bias (Alberto F. Alesina, Eliana La Ferrara, 2011).
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". Forensic science is not just what you see on television shows like CSI but rather the use of actual science to help determine the answer to varied legal questions. There are many different types of forensic disciplines that are used to help police and other officials answer these questions. These include criminalistics, forensic psychology, forensic pathology and others. Criminalistics is the science used to help understand the evidence in crimes.
tion Prosecutor vs Defense Counsel Tammie Matthews CJS 220 September 7, 2012 Thomas Lawrence Prosecutor vs Defense Counsel The Prosecutor and the Defense counsel play very different roles in the courtroom but both roles are vital in the outcome of the accused on trial. They both are responsible to display their legal skills and are responsible for using these skills to protect, defend, and uphold justice. The contrast is that these attorneys manage their responsibilities from very different perspectives (The Writers Office Online, 2012). The Prosecutor seeks justice above the importance of obtaining convictions. They are required to balance the interest of the community against the interest of defendants
Eyewitness Testimony By: Victoria Negron PSY 101-01 Eye witness testimonies form the bedrock of most judicial processes around the world. They make a solid impression on a jury, which has the exclusive role of ascertaining the credibility and veracity of the testimonies and make a verdict based on the truth they hold. This is because perjury is criminal and can subvert the integrity of a trial. Recognizing how fallible witness memories are, is paramount for those involved in the judicial process since trials circulate around factual determinations of whom to believe. The human memory has a propensity to recall erroneous events and even details that did not happen.
First you have the Prosecution. The responsibility of the prosecution is to prove that without a shadow of a doubt that the defendant committed the crime. Im sure there are times that the prosecution does not think the defendant is not guilty but it is there moral right to keep the trial going and prove their case. It has got to be difficult for the prosecution to know that because of the case they have built against a person could decide the rest of their life. Lets get to the Defense.
Final Essay Exam SWG 501 1.) Relate findings on group conformity to the process of jury deliberation. Group conformity explains the actions of individuals in a group and the pressure that someone can feel to conform to the ideas/opinions felt by other participants of the group. In jury deliberations, the dynamics of group conformity make the jury process effectively work to make unified decisions because members of the jury tend to conform to the majority will in an attempt to find resolve. This process is often supplemented through the actions of one member from the jury pool exhibiting a forceful and appealing personality, which can affect the group dynamic and cause other jury pool members to succumb to pressure for unanimity.
He or she is responsible for ensuring the court proceedings are legal, and that the defendant receives his or her rights to due process of law. The judge does this by setting the rules of the courtroom and acting as a referee between opposing council. Although a judges’ most visible role is during a criminal or civil trial, he or she has many responsibilities. Prior to any court hearing, the judge is responsible for signing search and arrest warrants. Judges also deal with the issue of bail once established that there is enough evidence to hold a criminal trial against the defendant during the preliminary hearing.
Judicial Activism: Analytic Essay Josh Walton 100888288 Caryma Sa’ad A09 135-2:25 Betina Kozmorav LAWS 1000A In contemporary society, judge’s rulings are largely based on personal philosophy and opinion. Law cannot be structured around beliefs, views or opinions rather it must perceived and viewed in regards to the tangible elements that are provided. Judicial activism is when judges substitute their own political personal opinions for the applicable law. Many see this as a flawed system due to the complications that emerge involving judicial bias. The term judicial activism has been around for six decades and has become a very popular tool for criticizing judge’s behaviour.
For example, the ever-changing law on how discrimination went from sanctioning segregation to dissolving segregation illustrates how adaptable common law is. This law also derives its basis from these court proceedings called precedents to guide cases based on past rulings. The one disadvantage of common law is how cases will surmise. As Rogers (2012) attests, “even the best judicial minds often disagree, based at least in part on their judicial philosophy and political ideology” (Section 1.1). Depending on each of the judge’s beliefs, cases can go in any direction from their analysis.