Annotated Bibliography: Australian Court System Annotated Bibliography Opeskin, Brian. 2013. The state of the judicature: A statistical profile of Australian courts and judges. The Sydney Law Review, 35, (3): 489-517. This article by Opeskin (2013) aims to provide a detailed account of Australian courts that accurately reflects how it functions today. Opeskin (2013) considers this ‘State of the Australian Judicature’ address is the first detailed account of information about the Australian courts and judges since Chief Justice Barwick’s inaugural address to Australian Legal Convention in 1977. Opeskin (2013) describes the judicial system with the purpose of revealing patterns within the system, which may in turn prompt reflection about their purpose. The article’s focus is on the larger questions regarding how the judicial system has evolved in the relatively recent past. Opeskin’s (2013) article is segmented into six sections, with each addressing a different attribute of Australian courts and judges based on available data: size and growth, tiers of the court hierarchy, state versus federal judicial systems, civil versus criminal subject matter, regional dynamics, and gender composition. Other features are identified although only briefly discussed. The data for this research was sourced from a variety of public and private places, …show more content…
It is a useful resource for understanding the characteristics of the Australian court system as a whole and clarifying assumptions about its nature. Opeskin (2013) does however state a limitation to his research is the available data on key aspects of the judicial system, which is not comprehensive in some areas. This article’s scope is limited to the features previously listed; therefore supplementary information about other features will be required for a fuller understanding of the judicial
During this series of court proceedings and examinations by the upper level of the court system, Elizabeth Clarke, Anne Weste, Elizabeth Gooding, Rebecca Weste, Hellen Clarke, and Anne Leech were all accused of witchcraft. Of these six women, only Elizabeth Gooding pleaded innocent to the accusations of witchcraft. Anne Weste had previously been convicted for witchcraft and was now a repeated offender, which carries a harsher sentencing. In the examinations, we see that these women are built up to be witches based on the English stereotype of witches. All of the women are accused of and admit to having a familiar spirit which they nurse with their own bodies.
The cultural dimensions of Canada and the Republic of Belarus provide insight as to why the structure and nature of the judicial systems differ from one another. However, before interpreting these dimensions, it is important to note that although the Republic of Belarus was established in 1994, it resembles Russia almost entirely in terms of culture. Therefore Hofstede’s study of Russia’s Cultural Dimensions is applicable to the Republic of Belarus. The Canadian structure and nature of its judicial system can be explained due to its high level of individualism (80) and low power distance (39). The high level of individualism can explain the reason why alternative to courts are accepted in Canada.
On the 14th of October 2011, Mr Rayney had submitted an application for a trial which only involved a judge without a jury present. This was due Mr. Rayney assuming that a strong bias had been manifested pre-trial as a result of the subjective publicity revolving around the death of his wife, Corryn(The Conversation, 2012). Therefore, the jury and any member of the public would already have preconceived views in favour of Mr Rayney being guilty of murdering his wife. The trial was successful for Mr Rayney where he was acquitted of murdering his wife. Similarly, this issue is somewhat common as it had also occurred in the case Evans v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASCA 182, in which both appellants had made appeals after being convicted for murder.
MILLERSBURG — Despite a plea for leniency expressed by the victim, a Sugarcreek man was unable to overcome a long history of criminal convictions and a bond violation when a Holmes County judge on Wednesday sentenced him to prison for making unwanted phone calls and threats to several members of a family over a period of months. David Lamar Schrock, 43, of 2578 State Route 39, previously pleaded guilty in Holmes County Common Pleas Court to two counts of telephone harassment and one count of menacing by stalking. In exchange for his guilty plea, the state agreed to dismiss two additional counts of telephone harassment and three counts of menacing by stalking. The charges are made more serious because Schrock was convicted, in January 2016,
One of the most important benefits, however, is the reduced risk of a compromise verdict. The overall benefit of majority verdicts suit the circumstances for all but the commonwealth laws. (Knox 2002) “When a lone ratbag juror can abort a trial, the time-honoured idea of the unanimous verdict starts to look decidedly unsound.” In the book ‘Secrets of the Jury Room’ Knox broadcasts the ideals of jurors acting selflessly and complains about rogue jurors messing up a trial.
The court structure in the United States is comprised of a dual court system. The dual court system consists of “one system of state and local courts and another system of federal courts” (Bohm & Haley, 2011, p. 274). Although the system has a separate court system for state and federal court, they do connect in the United States Supreme Court. Each court has various levels of jurisdiction to hear and make decisions over cases (Bohm & Haley, 2011).
Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.
The article Broken Bench explains the controversy over having “tiny courts” in New York State. The author, William Glaberson argues that the idea of justice within the jurisdiction of these tiny courts is unfairly decided among the justices in charge. Due to the lack of experience of these justices, it is difficult for fair justice to be dealt out. One of the major causes explained by the author for unfair justice is that the justices of the court are very inexperienced. For example, William Glaberson states, “Nearly three-quarters of the judges are not lawyers, and many — truck drivers, sewer workers or laborers — have scant grasp of the most basic legal principles.
The Court’s effectiveness relies on the institutional capacities as well as the ruling’s popularity. When lower-court judges comply with Supreme Court decisions, rulings can have a substantial effect on social policies, as in the case
(Yencken, D. 2008) Australia’s legal and political system meets these criteria. It is yet important to recognise that the rule of law significantly depends on legal precedent for its active upkeep. No government official may violate these limits. No ruler, minister, or political party can tell a judge how to decide a case.
The Merit Plan Judges in the state of Nevada ascend to their positions through an election by the citizens of Nevada. “In 2007 and 2009, the legislature approved a proposed constitutional amendment calling for merit selection of Nevada judges. ”(JudicialSelection. US) The Merit plan, is a system of appointing judges through bipartisan commissions who forward the lists of shortlisted candidates to the appointing authority to pick from the list.
Introduction on the importance of the case to Australian law and society and a very brief summary outline of what your article will cover: The Chamberlain vs The Queen case was an impactful Case that outlined the failures of the justice system when media and outside sources were providing the narrative, not the prosecution or the defendant. The Chamberlain vs The Queen case was a case in 1980 where two parents Lindy chamberlain and her husband Michael Chamberlain were accused of Murdering their baby at an Ayres Rock campsite in The NT. The case was heavily impacted by the Media and the local public accusing and continuing to push the narrative that the Chamberlains murdered their kid instead of what really happened where a dingo came and took
Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.
Judges has various roles and2 duties in the constitutional democracy of Canada. They interpret the law, assess the evidence presented, and control how hearings and trials unfold in their courtrooms. Most important of all, judges are impartial decision-makers in the pursuit of justice. (Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association, n.d.). The Canadian Judiciary is an adversarial system of justice and the legal cases are challenged between opposing sides, which assures that evidences and legal disputes will be completely and forcefully presented.
In this paragraph, the advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury will be discussed. The main advantages are that juries introduce community values into the legal process and can influence the system (Joyce, 2013); they can achieve a sense of equity and fairness without enforcing unjust laws; in addition, juries are independent and neutral (Davies, 2015). Moreover, they guarantee participation from the public in a democratic institution (Hostettler, 2004), and represent the population thanks to the randomness with which jurors are decided (Davies, 2015). On the other hand, the most important disadvantages are that jurors have no prior contact with the courts, no training (Hostettler, 2004) and therefore they lack knowledge of law, courtroom proceedings (Joyce, 2013), and lack of ability to understand the legal directions (Thomas, 2010). Moreover, they must face evidence which is highly technical (Hostettler, 2004).