Courtroom Players
CJS/200
Brain Carter
November 21, 2012
COURTROOM PLAYERS 2
Courtroom Players
In the United States criminal justice system, a courtroom work group is an informal arrangement between a criminal prosecutor, criminal defense attorney, and the judicial officer. This is a foundational concept in the academic discipline of the criminal justice system. Everyone in the courtroom group tries to get along. Often they act as if they are good friends. Although the members of the court group are against each other, at the end of the day justice is being served in the courtroom regardless of the gender, race, or national origin. The role of the prosecutor is to represent the government and prove the defendant is guilty of the crime. Prosecutors participate in, jury selection; opening statements, direct examination, cross-examination, and closing arguments. The prosecutor also makes sure that the jurors can be fair as well. Prosecutors are able to determine which cases to work by confirming if perhaps the case has merit, and sufficient evidence to purse a conviction. If the criteria for taking a case were more or less stringent, it would make the police officers job a lot harder by having to go more in depth then what they have to go through nowadays, and this is due to the prosecutor having to prove even more evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in court. Nonetheless, if the criteria for taking of a case were less stringent I think that the officers and the prosecutors jobs would be too easy to prove if someone is guilty, and it would not give a defendant a fair trail. Perhaps the change that I would make to the courtroom work group would be that, many people believe that the courtroom work group should consider adding more security. Though out the years several cases have been documented about felony’s grabbing the
COURTROOM PLAYERS 3
Courtroom Players
Police officers/sheriff’s pistol and shooting members of the courtroom, finally do think that the yelling in the courtrooms needs to be controlled.
You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
| |matters; they don't work with civil cases such as |citizens. This makes the prosecutor's duties somewhat |…
- 1062 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
The case that is being tried is case, 82A04-8876-CV-285, Deborah White vs. John Daniels and O 'Malley 's Tavern, and is being argued before a mock U.S. District Court, in the Northern District of Indiana. The plaintiff in this case is Deborah White, and her attorneys are Amanda Babbit and Jackson Walsh. The attorneys for the defendants, Patrick Daniels and O 'Malley 's Tavern, are Benjamin Walton and Jordan Van Meter.…
- 2181 Words
- 6 Pages
Better Essays -
One of the important roles a judge, a criminal prosecutor, and a criminal defense attorney will carry out is called, a “courtroom work group”. The courtroom work group interact on a daily basis by these three entities joining together to converse over matters such as if the case has probable cause to convict the offender or whether or not if there is enough evidence to go forward with a criminal trial. Normally, the prosecutor will try to persuade the defense that they do not have a case or try to talk the defense into a guilty plea or possible bail. In other words, anything they can do to speed up the process with various types of negotiations. The judge has to remain ethical and fair to see both sides of the prosecution and defense to determine if the negotiations are valid enough to go through with. Even though the judge, prosecutor, and defense attorney are the main officials of the courtroom work group, we cannot forget about other members that play a part as well. The minor (respectfully) members or other members that make up a courtroom work group are the court clerk, the bailiff, and the court reporter. The court clerk upholds all the records while the court reporter makes sure he/she transcribes the official proceedings. The bailiff helps to keep court order throughout a trial. Although I can understand how the main officers discuss the case and try to solve it without a trial, I feel that every case should be heard. The major problem with this though is time and money. In order for every offender to have a case without the prosecutor trying to convince the defense into something else, there would have to be a lot more courthouses with a lot more main officers. The only way this would ever happen is to hike up the taxes and no one wants their taxes to increase.…
- 1708 Words
- 7 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Every key player in the system should be held accountable for their decisions in regards to the accused. For example, judges should not be exempt from consequences when their rulings are inappropriate and result in social upheaval. A system of standards should be in place and after a certain number of infractions, they should be reprimanded or fired depending on the severity of the infraction. In order to avoid poor decision making due to lack of background inquiry, more interns from law schools should be employed to assist in researching the accused. Judges could then make better-informed…
- 1117 Words
- 5 Pages
Better Essays -
This court case took place in the United States Supreme Court in the Northern District of Indiana. The plaintiff in this court case is Deborah White, represented by Amanda Babbitt and Jackson Walsh. The defendants are Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern, represented by Benjamin Walton and Jordon Van Meter. Deborah White brought this court case to the Supreme Court in order to argue against the summary judgment filed by the defendents. A summary judgment is granted only if all of the written evidence before the court clearly establishes that there are no disputed issues of material fact and that the party who requested the summary…
- 401 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
In most courtrooms, there are groups of essential players that work together on a regular basis. They are composed of a combination of professionals. These professional are the ones which understand all phases of a criminal trial, and they all work together in fulfilling the functions of the court.…
- 279 Words
- 1 Page
Satisfactory Essays -
In the courtroom there is a group of key players that work together on a daily basis. They are made of a group of professionals. These professional are those who know all aspects of a criminal trial and they work together in performing the duties of the court.…
- 328 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
This court case took place in United States District Court in the Northern District of Indiana. This is court case number 82A04-8876-CB285, White vs. Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern. The lawyers in this case are Benjamin Walton, xxxxx Van Meter who represent the defendants Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern and Jackson Welch, Amanda Babot who represent the plaintiff Debbie White. The defendants Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern are seeking a summary judgment which is a procedural device used during civil litigation to promptly and expeditiously resolve a case without a trail. A judge grants summary judgment only if there are no disputes as to the material facts of the case and the party is entitle to judgment as a matter of law. (1) The defendants Patrick Gibbs and O’Malley’s Tavern claim there is no evidence to support that the bartender John Daniels saw any visual signs of intoxication from Edward Hart. This means the defendant isn’t subject to any legal wrong doing. The plaintiff Debbie White is requesting the court to deny the defendants request for summary judgment. The plaintiff claims there is evidence to show the bartender John Daniels saw visual signs that Edward Hart was intoxicated. The plaintiff claims that with the amount of alcohol Edward Hart had consumed in the time he was in the Tavern there would be noticeable visual signs that he was impaired. The plaintiff’s attorney claims there are four (4) factors of actual knowledge of intoxication which would point to visual signs of intoxication. Upon leaving O’Malley’s Tavern Edward Hart crashed his vehicle into the Plaintiffs vehicle causing harm to the Plaintiff and the death of her husband.…
- 612 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
In Virginia State, Jay Lentz was convicted by a jury in July 2003 for the kidnapping and murder of his wife. The jury recommended that Mr. Lentz spend life in prison; however, the United States District Judge Gerald Lee dismissed the kidnapping charge due to lack of evidence. Two weeks after the judge convicted Mr. Lentz of murder, he found evidence of prosecutorial misconduct therefore the judge ordered a new trial for the alleged murder charge.…
- 1215 Words
- 5 Pages
Better Essays -
As Americans, we rely a great deal on the entertainment industry to educate us about things we don’t understand. In many ways, we live vicariously through the experiences of fictional characters and believe they learn many things from those fictional characters. For example, many people have said they learned about forensic techniques by watching the “C.S.I.” shows on television. They firmly believe that can assist in an actual criminal investigation because they have seen “experts” on television handle similar situations.…
- 1338 Words
- 6 Pages
Powerful Essays -
A few changes that I think would be beneficial is increased security in courtrooms during trial of the violent offenders. Another recommendation is that matters that are not related to courtroom such like personal businesses and relations should be kept out of courtroom. Lastly, I feel the presiding judge should also maintain utmost impartiality to ensure objectivity in the courtroom. In my opinion these will all be highly beneficial in improving the courtroom procedure all together.…
- 740 Words
- 2 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
The courtroom work group has to work together to ensure all procedures are being followed and ensure the rights and safety of those in the courtroom. Each role in the courtroom communicates to each other to offer plea bargains, choose jurors, get witnesses called to testify, and review evidence. The role of the prosecutor is to represent the government or interests of the community in a criminal trial. The codes and standards that are in place are the duty to seek justice above the importance of obtaining a conviction. The prosecutor is responsible for proving the accused of legal guilt.…
- 314 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
There are many parts of the courtroom work group professionals who successfully pursuit justice and the process of convicting a criminal. The courtroom work group has a major role in convicting and finalizing a case. In the courtroom work group, there are three groups of people that hold the entire courtroom together. Without the work group, the courtroom would not flow, and coming to a conclusion to the case would not be as easy. The work group is made up of the Judge, the Defense Attorney, Public Defender, Court Recorders, and the Prosecutor Attorney. Which all are part of the courtroom work group which they work together to reach a decision, in the case by interacting among themselves and who’s involved an implicit recognition and rule of civility, cooperation, and sharing their goals. There are many roles in the work group, and if they are not all followed through with then the results could be different than what they should be. In this paper, we will look at the roles of the prosecutor, how the criminal justice funnel effects the courtroom work group and what will help eliminate the funnel and reduce the backlog of cases.…
- 1422 Words
- 4 Pages
Powerful Essays -
A. Lawyers who work within the parameters of the courtroom work group receive benefits for their clients, including more case information from prosecutors and perhaps better plea bargains. Lawyers who are less cooperative find that they do not get favorable case-scheduling considerations and get less favorable plea bargains.…
- 433 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
viewpoints of the power of the court, The Dynamic and the Constrained Court. In the Dynamic Court, the court is viewed as the main arbiter of social change, were social reform can occur without the delay of other political institutions. For proponents of the Dynamic Court view, the landmark Supreme Court cases such as, Brown v. Board of Education and Roe v. Wade are viewed as some as some of the strongest pieces of evidence that the court is an exceptional tool for activists. But the inherent problem with Dynamic Court viewpoint is that a ruling does not necessarily lead to change. Though Brown v. Board ruled against school segregation, segregation persisted until the involvement of the federal government in the 1960s. Though Roe v. Wade ruled…
- 1936 Words
- 8 Pages
Powerful Essays