Part 1 – Initial Investigation and Trial
Function of the Criminal Courts
The criminal courts provide the disputing parties with a forum where they resolve their disputes. They provide a peaceful way of handling the grievances that exist between warring parties. They also offer the forum for testing and enforcing laws in a rational and fair mechanism. Criminal courts are entitled with the function of making decisions based on the stipulation of the law and the evidence provided (Van & Van, 2000). Consequently, they have no room for showing favoritism or for showing bias. The courts also provide justice as the innocent are protected from harm and attack by criminals, and the guilty are punished. Moreover, the criminal courts also safeguard civil liberties of all the citizens.
Prosecuting Attorney and the Defense Attorney
The defense attorney is an officer of the court who is entrusted with the duty of serving as the accused person's counselor and advocate. The attorney is expected to serve this role with courage and devotion to render effective and quality representation. Furthermore, the defense attorney is entitled to the role of representing the client until the trial is over (Scheb & Scheb, 2014). They do not have the burden of proof, as they are not expected to prove that the accused is innocent. Instead, they should point out how the court has not established guilt. In this case study, the pro-Bono lawyer representing Tim Barns and Jack Carter had the duty of working against the witness to prove that their information was insufficient (Cryer, 2010),
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Furthermore, they could have proved that the police pressed Jack who was a minor unto confession. Moreover, they could have proven that the police did not even obtain the parent's permission, as this is illegal according to the law. Moreover, although the fibers and clothing resembled those at the crime scene, the attorney could also have proven that that was not enough evidence, as there are many fibers and clothing in possession of other people, which resembled those at the crime scene (Millane, 2006). Arguably, using these to accuse the two teenagers was insufficient proof. Moreover, the two witnesses posited that they heard the two boys confess they did the murder and were planning more murders. Notably, a witness can be paid to testify and offer false witness; In this case, unless the evidence is filmed or recorded, there is no way to proof that the words were true. Based on that, it was vital for the defense attorney to request for deeper tests such as DNA identification. Moreover, the information from the witnesses was inconsistent with other facts of the case, meaning that the defense attorney had a good ground to convince the jury that the information was insufficient. He should also have used information to prove that the boys were absent from the crime scene at the time of the offense.
On the other hand, the prosecuting attorney is entrusted with the duty of proving that the accused is guilty beyond all reasonable doubts. They achieve this by providing all the evidence that they have against the accused (Barkan, 2015). Moreover, they question witnesses so that they can convince the jury that the accused is indeed guilty. In this case, the prosecution attorney collected some information from the teenagers' homes that resembled the material at the scene and looked for some witnesses. However, it is notable that the witnesses offered some inconsistent information. The prosecuting attorney should have provided more tangible facts such as DNA results that would prove that the boys were responsible.
Adversarial model or the consensual model
The consensual model of argument is mainly characterized by cooperation whereby each party's argument is taken into consideration by the other. On the contrary, the adversarial model is characterized by competition where one party strives to be the winner. Moreover, each party only favors their opinion. In this case study, the adversarial method was used as the prosecution attorney and the defense attorney both represented their cases with a motive of winning the case. Notably, the prosecution attorney looked for witnesses who did not even have the real facts and even provided some evidence from the boys' homes as prove of their guilt. On the other hand, the defense attorney also defended their case albeit they lost. The method focused more on protecting the due process rights and not crime control.
Part 2 – Jury Decision
Function of the Criminal Court Jury
The criminal court jury is entrusted with the function of hearing and determining serious criminal issues. The jury hears the evidence provided and applies the law according to the judge's instructions (Barkan, 2015). It then decided if the accused is guilty of innocent. A notable fact is that the jury plays no role in the sentencing process.
The Jury in America
Juries are important in the American society as they prevent the existence of oppressive laws, regulations, and verdicts. The jury acts as a check to the unconfined prosecutorial power. Although the prosecutors in the American system possess much power, they understand that the cases will be presented to a jury of several people who are unknown to them based on the evidence provided. As a result, the prosecutors avoid making unreasonable charges.
Juries also prevent the judges from deciding every case, as this would raise issues to do with the fairness of the judicial process. For example, the judges could be swayed by public opinion or politics. On the contrary, juries are not appointed, and they are able to minimize the influence of media and the public on given issues or cases. Moreover, juries are important, as they are sometimes composed of lay people who are asked to understand the complex legal concepts and apply them without allowing their emotions to overrule their decisions.
Jury In This Case
Juries are important in the society as they give impersonal judgment based on the evidence that is provided in the case (McCord, McCord, & Bailey, 2012). They also reduce the partiality that would occur in the case of their absence in the legal system. In this case study, the jury seemed biased, as they never tested the evidence provided to proof if it was true or false. They should have demanded more evidence such as DNA tests given that the information from the two witnesses was inconsistent with the other facts in the case.
Part 3 – Appeal
Alford Pleas should not be allowed because in the first place the defendant is not guilty and they should therefore not admit that the court has a right to find them guilty without any shadow of a doubt. The law sounds manipulative at that point (Bibas, 2017). As earlier mentioned, the prosecution and trial failed to do their job well in this case as they sentenced two teenagers who were not guilty of the offense. The work gives a negative impression of the legal profession as it shows that the innocent can end up suffering for mistakes they did not make (Barkan, 2015). This work further highlights the problems that people associate with attorneys as some feel that pro-Bono attorneys fail to defend the defendants, as they would do if their clients paid. In this case, the pro-Bono attorney failed to push for the case and render the evidence false. Secondly, the people also feel that some prospector attorneys would use false information to prove that the accused is guilty. This was the case in the case study as the two witnesses offered false information, implying they may even have been paid to lie.
Moreover, the case shows a negative light on the court system as it shows that the attorneys do not always reveal what is right. Moreover, it shows that even the jury cannot be trusted too much as it also makes mistakes in its judgment. Another negative aspect is that the accused can be coerced to confess, as was the case in the young teenager Jack.
The positive thing about the prosecuting attorney is that he was aggressive enough to create a case, albeit the boys were innocent. However, in his quest to prove that they were guilty, he made the real criminals go free for the 6 years before the boys appealed. The other positive thing about the court system was that it allows appeals, as that gives the convicted people a chance to appeal for their cases.
A plea bargain refers to the situation in a criminal case where a guilty plea is given on a lesser charge than what the offender is originally charged with by the prosecuting officer (Barkan, 2015).The accused prefer plea-bargaining because there are less severe as compared to the judgment that may come from the prosecutors. In this case, the accused may opt not to have the jury in their cases making their hearings undemocratic
Finally, I prefer the substantive values approach as the procedural approach only focuses on values such as speed, autonomy, efficiency, accuracy, and certainty (Bibas, 2017). The substantive approach offers reform, education, a vindication of victims, retribution, and social norms, which all work to for a healthy society.
References
Barkan, S., (2015). Law and Society: An Introduction. Routledge: New York.
Bibas Stephanos (2017). Harmonizing substantive criminal law values and criminal procedure: the case of Alford and Nolo contendere pleas . Retrieved from: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plea/four/nolo.html#65
Cryer, R. (2010). An introduction to international criminal law and procedure . Cambridge [UK: Cambridge University Press.
McCord, J. W. H., McCord, S. L., & Bailey, C. S. (2012). Criminal law and procedure for the paralegal: A systems approach . Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Cengage Learning.
Millane, V. (2006). Legal studies . Glebe, NSW: Pascal Press.
Scheb, J. M., & Scheb, J. M. (2014). Criminal law and procedure
Van, D. T. R., & Van, D. T. R. (2000). American law and the legal system: Equal justice under the law . Albany, NY: West Legal Studies/Thomson Learning.
