Courtroom Observation

Improved Essays
My day started with going to Judge Lippitt’s courtroom. The trial had already started, the defendant’s councilor was doing his opening statement. He was in the middle of telling everyone in the courtroom that this case was about, disagreement on how much bone was removed. Further, calming that the judgment call was on the surgeon who actually saw joint and arthritis. A doctor was brought up, saying that he wanted the least invasive first for the patient, but then it got to the more invasive procedures. He believes that the other doctor, let’s call him doctor 2, made the right diagnostic. He brings up the x-ray of the patient’s foot before and after the operation. He continues saying that the original judgment call belongs to the surgeon because …show more content…
I had been wanting to observe a jury selection, I finally observed some in Judge Ewell’s courtroom. Judge and counsels are discussing to see what jurors can be excuse when I went in. The jurors came back in and took almost all the seats, the prosecutor started his questioning. There are some jurors that attempt to complicate the question. The prosecutor would sometimes ask questions to specifically one juror or to groups. They would ask questions if they had any bias like for example, with police officers. The jurors were then asked if they can put their bias aside. The prosecuting counsel would ask if anyone had any feelings about glasses hut’s and clarified they had to set them aside. The prosecutor used a rape hypothetical as follows, if there was no evidence, but the victim was credible enough would they say the defendant was guilty or would you require more witnesses. They went down the jury box trying to get a response for the hypothetical. Most, would say yes, some would give a lengthy answer. Judge Ewell stopped the hypothetical and asked the prosecutor to follow legal instructions. Then, the prosecutor gave the jury an example of direct evidence and circumstantial evidence using rain and umbrella’s. She said that both types of evidence used in the example are as good. The prosecutor asked one of the jurors about the defendant because she said she felt uncomfortable with him. Then, the Judge asked if there would be any bias because of the comfort issue. Judge Ewell went around from juror to juror asking them to state the answers to the questions on the board which are questions about them after that, she would ask them if they had any yeses to the questions and if do which were they. Some of the jurors would ask for sidebars if they wanted to answer to a question

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The prosecutor is a lawyer who represents the government and they are responsible for making the decision whether to charge someone with a crime. The first thing the prosecutor looks for is a sound case, because in some situations you have cases that have legal problems that could get the case thrown out of court. Example if the police officer violated the defendants’ rights while looking for evidence then that evidence would be inadmissible. Also the prosecutor needs to figure out if there is enough supporting evidence to have a higher probability of a conviction. “The duty of a public prosecutor is to present the case against an accused person by bringing all the evidence that is necessary and available, and presenting it in the best…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Jury Decision Making Essay

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Typically jurors enter a trial setting believing that the defendant is guilty. It is the opposing legal counsel’s argument that sways their opinions. Overall, the prosecutor’s opening arguments; the jurors’ initial impression of the defendant(s) and the jurors’ personal values from an initial influence. The jurors use these stimuli to evaluate the case as the counselors present new statement and evidence, continually renewing this process through the trial. Once the juror had formed an opinion it is unlikely that they will change the verdict they…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    What was more disturbing was the fact that some jurors appeared to accept the labels placed on the defendant and base their vote on what the majority decided. If it had not been for juror #8’s persistence in trying to persuade the other jurors that there was the possibility of doubt that the defendant did commit the murder I believe the defendant would have been found guilty within…

    • 701 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This hearing determines if there is sufficient evidence that exists against an offender to continue the criminal justice process. The judge in this step searches for a probable cause to prove a crime was committed and the suspect accomplished doing so. Nevertheless, if a probable cause is determined, the accused suspect is held for trial on the information, which results in formal charging. In federal cases and other states, there is a grand jury that is empanelled to determine if there is enough evidence to file indictment charges against the suspect with the crimes. However if the grand jury finds there is sufficient evidence to warrant a trial it issues a true bill, if not it issues a no bill and he or she is filtered out of the criminal justice network (Appalachian State University, n.d).…

    • 1283 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    If the defendant does want to appeal a guilty plea, most likely the judge and the jury are asking them sleeves, “if he didn’t do it, then why did he admit to it”. Making it much harder for a guilty plea to be tossed. This also brings into question his or her creditability, changing your statement after some time to think about it may seem odd to some. Changing a plea is easier done by the defendant, if he or she has favorable evidence against the prosecutors case. This evidence may be the lack of creditability the prosecutors main witness, DNA evidence or something that can confirm his or her…

    • 751 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Witnesses were Sarah Kelly a neighbor saw what happened, embrace a bystander and detective Hefler and expert witness who had been working with controlling the gang violence in the Silver Spring area. The prosecutor and the defense attorney did a direct examination and direct examination, by asking the four witnesses. An expert witness was also questioned and testified that even though, Sanchez name did not appear in the criminal database; he might be part of the gang. During the trial, the judge…

    • 831 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Rodney King Beating Trial

    • 971 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Koon stated that, “ [I] was approaching the point where deadly force was going to be required”(linder Excerpts). Koon’s testimony helped sway the trial from having all four officers on trial to only two that were main contributors in the beating because only two of the officers felt that deadly force was required. The turning point in the trial was when Prosecutor White was prosecuting Officer Powell. According to Douglas linder, professor of law at the University of Missouri at Kansas City, the transcript states that “PROSECUTOR WHITE: So you go up to someone and say, "How many people did you beat today?” Powell went on to say that his statement was only professional police jargon and it was not intended to be interpreted this way (Linder Excerpts). The final verdict of the trial resulted in two of the four officers being found guilty for excessive use of force by a police officer.…

    • 971 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As the defense it is you job to cross examine the witness, find contradictions in their testimony, and get a not guilty verdict. Sometimes a witness will want to keep their testimony as vague as possible so you will have to badger the witness for more…

    • 1166 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The textbook defines the harmless error doctrine as an incident where “an appellate court can affirm one’s conviction despite the presence of of serious prosecutorial misconduct during the trial” (p. 52). This doctrine exemplifies how prosecutors can practically feel inclined to engage in misconduct seeing that it is very difficult for the court system to punish them for such behavior. Furthermore, this doctrine may also apply to serious cases such as death penalty trials, demonstrating the potential for prosecutor misconduct to negatively effect the outcome of any case, large or small. The author of the chapter provides his suggestion considering the current method in which the criminal justice system deals with motions of trial misconduct. He suggests, “motions for retrial based on false testimony presented by prosecution witnesses should be governed by a standard drawn from newly discovered evidence and prosecutorial misconduct” (p. 52).…

    • 652 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In this essay, I stated that the jury would find defendant Rebekah Ponder guilty of the murder of Walter White, and would find the defendant Elshaday Yilma complicit. Also, I claimed that evidence would be found insufficient for the jury or an otherwise reasonable person to convict either defendant of robbery. Ultimately, my prediction was not far off from the actual decisions made by the jury. After analyzing the evidence put before them by the prosecution and both defense teams, the jury found Rebekah Ponder guilty of murder, and not guilty of any form of robbery. This outcome matches what I believed Ponder would be convicted of.…

    • 1763 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays

Related Topics