Lawrence Brosseau was wrongfully convicted to due language barriers and lack of effort from his defense lawyer. Brosseau is an Indigenous and was twenty-two years old at the time of conviction. His lack of English speaking meant that he had to use a Cree interpreter as a lawyer while in court. However, the interpreter he was given could hardly understand him, so his testify was inaccurate. In the article, his lawyer says, "I don't pretend to have any particular understanding of his mind or of his intent."…
Overall, this year’s Native Son Mock Trial went very well, even if there are a few growth areas for the lawyers and witnesses. Most of the lawyers did a very good job presenting their ideas and examining witnesses. Growth areas for them would be to be more prepared when going up questioning the witnesses, speaking louder, and actually asking relevant questions that would support their side. Additionally, I think the judge should know her responsibilities better and know when to say what. In addition, the judge should have been more forceful and assertive, so the trial could go by smoothly.…
The Smart Trial Debate Judge Glassford sits at the head of the classroom as students take each other on in a debate that questions the innocence or guilt of Pamela Smart in the conspiracy to murder her husband Gregory Smart. The students in the English 151-38 class had been divided into two groups: Prosecution (Affirmative of Pamela Smart’s guilt) vs. Defense (Negative- Pamela Smart is innocent), prior to this eventful day. During the debate, both sides provided valid evidence for their arguments on the Smart Trial. Being on the Defense side allows me to provide an account of the events that occurred during this student-debate and also a reflection on how effectively my team members debated Pamela Smart’s innocence. First and foremost, the…
The jury is a mix of opinion on the war and the definition of treason. Both the defendant and prosecutor give their opening arguments that were both expertly prepared and everyone in the courtroom knew it was going to be a long, intense trial. The prosecutor’s main argument was that Jefferson was guilty of treason because everyone in that courtroom had strong connection to Great Britain in some way and for Jefferson to go against the country that gave him the right to live in American was by definition treason. Adams rebottled with the claim that Jefferson was not guilty by the fact that treason was necessary in response to the tyranny that was forming in Great…
The Pendle witch trial begins when Alizon device encountered a peddler named John Law. When Alizon asked John Law to do her a favor, he refused, leading to her anger and a curse being put on him. The curse left John with what was thought to be an illness brought on by a witch. John Law’sfamily took this matter into their own hands, going to the authorities of that time for help. The authorities went and asked Alizon a statement about what happen.…
The trial went very well, in my opinion and everyone was able to keep up with their professional roles. The lawyers did a very good job on coming up with questions on the spot and then stating what they were trying to prove by asking those questions. In particular, Adriana and Tasfia did very good on trying to prove their claim and make sure that the answers they got would tie back to their original claim. I liked how Adriana would ask medical questions to the doctors and she was able to ask questions that would support Bigger’s insane mentality. Tasfia had a very powerful opening speech and everything was clearly and precise.…
These trials were run to bring Nazi war criminals to justice. Twenty-one men sat on trial for their crimes, eighteen were found guilty, eleven were hanged, and the other seven served ten years to life for their crimes. The one man I am going to focus on is Lieutenant Colonel Adolf Eichmann. He was ruthless when describing his role in the killing of Jews in Europe. Hannah Arednt, who was a witness to the trial, described him as a “thoughtless, self-serving bureaucrat who just wanted to please his Nazi masters” (Alkadry, Witt, p.1).…
I headed into the courtroom of Judge Thomas Marcelain to observe my first courtroom trial. The trial involved a 31-year-old man named, Daniel Bohanna, of Pataskala. Mr. Bohanna decided to represent himself in his trial for fear of misrepresentation. He was charged with rape, kidnapping, and felonious assault. I have seen footage on T.V. from famous trials and of course seen reenactments from Hollywood, but I have never been to one in person until now.…
In the play, 12 Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, the characters of this story appear to be nothing more than average people picked to stand and listen to a case of a boy accused of homicide. As the characters are supposed to leave personal issues at the door of the case, some appear to use them against the boy. Using these imperfect jurors, people can see how that when insecurities, flaws, and the law form together, the justice system can be found. The justice system is neither perfect nor is it imperfect. To sum it up, is people are put to the test of humanity to decide what must become of the case.…
In the film, 12 Angry Men, many of the jurors had task roles within the group. Juror 8 played the role of energizer. According to Zastrow (2015), the energizer, “Stimulates a higher quality of work from the group” (p. 84). Instead of letting all the men vote guilty, he made them question their decision. He brought up key points that made them dig deep into the case, and look at the situation from different perspectives.…
In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, several jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos is the most influential because…
Although verging on the progressive, Richard II presents a rudimentary version of this procedure when Bolingbroke listens to testimony regarding the death of the Duke of Glouster. This trial, like that of treason, was considered a criminal offence and, therefore, scholar J.H. Barker would posit that a petty jury was warranted based upon a breach of the king's peace as he writes, "[t]he classical form of the 'petty jury' appeared first in criminal suits, where its use was warranted by the complaint of a breach of kings peace" (73). During this trial, Bolingbroke hears the testimony from Bagot, who accuses the Duke of Aumerle of conspiring to kill the Duke of Glauster. Both men throw down their gages and, once again, a trial by combat arises…
Contrasting Views The views of Tom Robinson’s trial are viewed very differently between the people in Maycomb County. The trial itself shows the hatred between black and whites in the community. People see the trial in all different angles, most of which are thought to be considered right. The children’s view of the trial is what any innocent child would see, which is that they thought it was unfair and Tom Robinson was not guilty.…
After three cases had gone by I finally had the courage to ask the Judge a couple of questions. Since I was doing a project on Probation Supervised Youth I mentioned the crossover youth and she told me that it was the wrong term and I should be using dually involved youth, which helped for the assignment. During the small break while waiting for another case, Ramona and I made plans to come back and meet at the courthouse Thursday at 8:30am, so I could experience the North Wing which is the criminal side of the courthouse. We were in the East Wing in room 822. Also the Judge invited us to come back and watch more at 9:30am for dependency court hearings.…
My give an account of court perception concentrates on perceptions from two courts. The first was the Civil Justice Center. It houses the Manchester County Court and the Manchester District Registry of the High Court, and in addition Manchester City Magistrates' Family Courts, the District Probate Registry and the Regional and Area Offices of the Court Service. The second one was the Crown Court on Minsull Street in Manchester City Center for criminal court perceptions. Under the watchful eye of going to, every court was reached with a specific end goal to discover the circumstances and cases that could be gone to as a few cases, for example, youth cases are not open to people in general.…