District Attorney's Role In Criminal Justice

In order for the people whose job it is to determine innocence or guilt of a person need more than just expert testimony in the form of a long drawn out explanation. Videos, photographs, or audio recordings are all helpful tools when presenting a case to a jury. In this case with Andrea Yates, there was so much evidence presented that could either have a positive or negative effect on the outcome of the trial. Prosecuting attorneys gave the jurors quite a horrific scene to digest mentally. Andrea Yates taped confession of the murdering of her five children were played for the jurors. In this she explained that she felt she was actually saving her children from being punished for having what she believed was an unfit mother. The 911 call Mrs. Yates made after the crime was also played for the jury. The jurors were also shown the actual crime scene photos of where the murders took place, as well as the how the mother of these five children laid them by each other after she drowned them one by one. The jury was shown videos of more normal times for the family, when things seemed to be going well. Expert testimony also played a role in the outcome of the first trial. The evidence presented in this case was able to help the jury come to a decision when determining Mrs. Yates final

I have chosen cases Gideon v. Wainwright and Miranda v. Arizona Podcast to expand on. In the case Gideon v. Wainwright, Clarance Earl Gideon was a man that didn’t have a very long education, he went until eighth grade and then ran away from home while in middle school. All of his early adult life he spent going in and out of prisons for crimes that weren’t even considered violent. Clarance was then accused of breaking and entering, stealing money out of the vending machines in Panama City, Florida. In his trial, Mr. Gideon requested that an attorney be appointed to him seeing as he could not afford one, the judge of his trial then told him attorneys only get provided for those whose cases would result in the death penalty if they were to be

Once someone steps in the court room to oversee a trial of this caliber (or any caliber) they must not and will not let the media dictate their perspective of events. Scott Peterson’s jury saw the burden of proof provided by the prosecution and were left with no doubt in their minds by their own deductions he was guilty. The Casey Anthony jury on the other hand took all of the evidence into consideration, but they still were not completely convinced she was capable of the charges being filed against her, leaving them no other decision but to provide a not guilty

They have told you the true story of what happened that fateful night on June 17, 2016. Their testimonies show you that the defendant was not helpless and that she had many opportunities to leave her husband. In addition, their testimonies showed you that the defendant knowingly and premeditatedly murdered her unconscious husband. Unlike the defense, the prosecution and its witnesses have no gain by lying to

Chapter 4 of the book We the People talks about Civil Liberties, this chapter mainly talks about the Rights that were placed in the Constitution (not in the Bill of Rights), it also talks about the Bill of Rights and it describes the rights protected by the Bill of Rights. It also talks about specific rights that work close together with the Bill of Rights and Amendments rights. One of the first Amendments that is described in great detail is Freedom of Speech and Religion. The first Amendment protects US citizens right to talk about almost any topic in the United States. I said almost any topic because there are some forms of speech that aren’t protected by the First Amendment (these forms of speech can be limited or prohibited), some of the forms of speech that aren’t protected by the First Amendment are Fighting Words and Hate Speech, Student Speech, Libel and Slander speech. These forms of speech aren’t protected by the First Amendment because they can help to incite people

From an early age I have always had an interest in the legal system, as a child of divorcees the legal system has always had an impact on my life. I have always dreamed about being a family lawyer and have hoped that through hard work and dedication I could make my dream a reality; enter law school, successfully complete the bar exam and utilize my knowledge of the law to help those who may otherwise be left in the cold by the legal system. As I have grown older I have a new understanding of the realities of just how difficult it will be to make my dreams a reality.

The controversial serial podcast that has grabbed the nation’s attention has generated many different opinions and view points, and the reality of this podcast has played a major role in the appeal of this story. The case of Adnan Syed has been completely mishandled & absolutely needs to be reconsidered. Adnan case has been completely botched and has many holes, and he has been claiming his innocence since day one. There is absolutely not enough evidence to convict him, since the prosecution completely twisted the evidence and made him look like an evil person.

When someone has committed a crime, they are put on trial and they go through the motions of the judicial system. In 12 Angry Men, Reginald Rose creates a play that displays the judicial system in its truest form. It tells the story of the jury, as they have to come to a unanimous verdict of whether the defendant is guilty, innocent, guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, of murder. The main conflict that the jurors face in the play is whether to charge him as guilty or not. Through the conflict in the book, the flaws in the justice system are illustrated and reasonable doubt appears. They are most apparent through the first vote, the change of heart in the seventh juror and the final verdict.

Bailiff: “All rise. Department one of the superior court is now in session. Please be seated.”

Imagine living in a place where one small sin could define who you are for the rest of your life. That is what happened in The Scarlet Letter written by Nathaniel Hawthorne in 1850. The novel is set in a seventeenth-century Puritan community in Boston, Massachusetts. A young woman by the name of Hester Prynne commits a small act of adultery and is shamed for the rest of her life, by wearing a scarlet letter “A” on her breast. The book is centered around the theme of justice and judgement. According to Gloria Steinem, “Law and justice are not always the same”. This quote means that following the law may not always mean justice is being served. Laws are rules and guidelines that are set up to govern behavior. Laws set out standards, procedures

The justice system is constant work in progress as the system must change and evolve to meet the needs, demands and requirements of the times we live in. The justice system and its statutes sometimes struggle to keep up with the ever-changing world; thus making them lag behind. As stated, one of the core functions of the justice system is to provide intervention programs for those individuals who are deemed to be at risk. Intervention programs do exist but still the justice system is overburden with many criminal cases. The inability of justice programs to work as they are intended to is seen as one of the significant problems facing the justice system. Welsh and Harris (2013) seeks to explain the inability of the justice programs to not work in stating, “The problem is that many criminal justice interventions fall short of their goals because of poor planning, poor implementation, and poor evaluation. It is fair to say we have not yet discovered “what works” to reduce crime.” From this, it is clear that the development of interventions is not the issue and not the cause for them to not succeed in their mandates but the problem is within their planning.

You 're accused of a crime you know you didn 't commit, how would you feel if when you went to court you didn 't get to have a jury to have a better chance of the verdict siding with you, and not get accused of a crime. The judge immediately decides your guilty and you 're put on probation , faced with charges you don 't have the money to pay ,or even get sent to jail. “ The jury system arose in England hundreds of years ago. If there was a crime committed in the community, the accused was brought to a jury. The judge presided over the trial and served as a legal expert… The jury heard the events and accused guilty or not-guilty (Is The American Jury System Still A Good Idea?).” Jury trials should remain an option because because we as Americans have the right of the seventh , jurors are only told 100 percent of proven information, and the jurors are not influenced by media, people, or unproven information to make a decision and the

If ever there was a botched case it was this one with inconsistencies on the part of the State being overwhelming. I watched this trial intently and read everything available. The verdict in this case generated an epidemic of outrage throughout the world. I agree with the not-guilty verdict on the murder one and two charges; however, the evidence is not as incontrovertible as some have suggested. I also agree that there was some mischaracterization around the 31 days; yet, to trivialize this behavior as simply immature is inaccurate.

The discretion of the case was significant in the regard of the defense, which countered some contradicted evidences. The evidences from the trial and the hearing preliminaries have revealed that the children were coached. The testimony showed lack of credibility on the issues and showing the significance of the discretion on the defense. McMartin told his attorney that he did not do it and his attorney used his discretion and believed him.

Laws are important because they are guidelines for a state. Without laws citizens would not know how to act and cause harm to others. Laws are aimed at common good and keep a society together and functioning. States have laws to maintain peace and safety among people and provide ways to resolve issues that arise among individuals. As a citizen of a state you are expected to obey all laws. An environment without laws will cause the typical exercises of life to be affected by the chaos. In Plato’s book, Crito, Socrates believes you should always obey the law. You are obligated to obey unjust laws because you tacitly agree to obey the laws, people have different opinions what is just or unjust, and there are many consequences when disobeying a law.