Lets get to the Defense. The defense attorney has the job of proving that the defendant is innocent without a shadow of a doubt. Even if it looks like he or she may have done it it is morally right to defend that person until he or she if proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt. This is a lot of weight to have on ones shoulders. The fate of another human being is in your hands.
But in contrast there are very different at the same time. The crime control model is used in the criminal justice system for the prevention of crime. The crime control does not exclude that is possible to make a mistake, but based on the circumstances of the laws, the person is considered guilty until her or she is proven innocent. This model is based on old fashion laws which allow rapid and speedy convictions despite the mitigating factors of the case and the victim. The results, of the crime control model are wrongful convictions, being over-turned and this is a major downfall in the criminal justice system.
Case Analysis Assignment-The Trial of Orenthal J. Simpson April 7th, 2013 Fundamentally, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution and means that they are required to present evidence during a trial that must prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the defendant did in fact commit the crime they are being charged with. The burden of proof entails that the prosecution present evidence that is accurate of the guilt of the defendant and in addition persuade the jury that the evidence presented establishes that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The Latin meaning of prima facie is first look. It refers to criminal prosecution wherein the evidence previous to the trial is satisfactory to prove a case except there is significant ambiguous evidence given at the trial. Subsequent to the prosecution putting on the total of its evidence, the defense attorney will customarily ask for a dismissal of the charges due to lack of sufficient evidence.
Defenses and Due Process Kylee Rivers CJS/220 Defenses and Due Process According to Gardner and Anderson (2011), an individual is only charged for a crime he/she committed intentionally. He suggests that such a crime must be without defense so that an individual is declared guilty. Defenses are situations that can stop or lessen the guilt in a case. Presentations of evidence for such situations ensure an accused person is defended from guilt. According to Gardner and Anderson (2011), the common elements of defense include insanity, entrapment and self-defense.
A civil case is when the plaintiff decides to sue another person, organization, or a business, the individual being sued is also called the defendant. In a criminal case, the crime is based on offenses against the state, with the prosecutor charging the suspect for the crime and not the actual victim charging the suspect. (The Differences between a Criminal Case and a Civil Case, n.d) Many fundamental distinctions between a civil and criminal case separate them from one another in our court system, which include but are not limited to; the standard of proof required in a criminal case compared to that of a civil case, the terms and forms of punishment, and also whether or not you are entitled to an attorney. “In general, because criminal cases have greater consequences - the possibility of jail and even death - criminal cases have many more protections in place and are harder to prove.” (The Differences between a Criminal Case and a Civil Case, n.d) A duty placed upon a civil or criminal defendant to prove or disprove a disputed fact is known as standard of proof. (Standard of proof.
The trial judge looks for evidence that the defendant acted intentionally, outrageously, recklessly or with conscious disregard for the rights of others. Such conduct is generally deemed sufficiently egregious to warrant the imposition of punitive damages. If the facts can support such a finding, the punitive damage issue is allowed to go to the jury.' Once the question has been submitted to the jury, the generally accepted rule is that the jury, in its sole, unfettered discretion, determines whether to award punitive damages and in what amount.' "It is the long settled and uniformly adhered to rule in our jurisprudence that the amount of punitory or exemplary damages is solely within the discretion of the jury, and, no matter what the sum of their * Professor of Law, Marquette University Law School, Milwaukee, WI.
Plea-bargaining is essentially an agreement between the prosecutor and the accused in which the accused pleads guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence or a reduced charge. It is a recognized procedure in the criminal justice system that aims to reduce the clogging of cases in court. It is said that aside from the plea bargaining, the criminal justice system, state laws and the US Constitution provides the accused with different legal defenses which he can use to avoid conviction or to relieve him from criminal liability. These defenses are negative defenses such as the denial of the crime or affirmative defenses such as by admitting the crime but alleging circumstances such as self-defense, insanity, provocation, and violation of the right
In criminal defense cases there can be several type of defense types which are used in order to try and convince the jury and judge that the defendant is not guilty of his/her crime. Some types of common criminal defenses are that of The Insanity Defense, The Affirmative Criminal, Coercion and Duress, Abandonment or withdrawal and many others as well. Criminal defenses are not the types of options that just come up but instead there are the factors that all defendant attorneys work towards for their client so that they can prevent a guilty verdict upon the case. All criminal defenses are constructed so that an argument(s) can be created upon the prosecuting attorneys, so that no charges fall against or go through to the accused defendant. Criminal defense of insanity is one type of popular strategy which is tried to be used by many criminal offenders whom are found to be guilty of their crimes or are about to fall within law’s hands.
Jury nullification is the right of any jury during a trial to decide the guilt of the defendant even if the judge has already found the defendant guilty of charges and has decided the punishment. The jury can overturn the judge’s verdict and allow the defendant to go free without serving any time for the guilty verdict. This is if they believe that the guilty verdict is unjust for the crime that was committed or the law that is being served upon the defendant. Ethnicity based jury nullification is when the jury would be composed of a specific race based on what race the defendant. This way, the jury would allow the defendant to go free based on the fact of race to prove a point to the criminal justice system that they need to stop going after minorities.
The statement, “No matter how strong the prosecution’s evidence may be, if the magistrate or the jury has any reasonable doubt that he or she is guilty, the accused is entitled to be acquitted” proves that there should be no doubt when convicting a person. The standard of proof and evidence that the adversary system employs are among the