Introduction
The role of courts in society is a discourse topic that is aimed at finding the merits of the justice system of a community. The courts are tasked with the exercise of jurisdiction over a wide variety of cases that occur within the society. The courts are therefore required to resolve disputes which have no previous judicial redress. An ordinary court is, therefore, a set tribunal that is presided over by a judge or a magistrate that is entrusted with hearing and giving out verdict (judgment) in both civil and criminal cases. The courts' system is part of the judicial arm of the government which is tasked with ensuring that laws strictly adhere. Despite the existence of the courts, the society disputes can never end yet it has to be governed by the rule of law. The conflicts or conflicts form part of the social woes, and it is the court systems that play pivotal duty conflict resolutions, or existing conflicts that have to be legally addressed. The disputes range with some having sensitive magnitude down to those with small magnitude. Most judicial systems, therefore, categorize courts into several structures or hierarchy levels that deal with the specified quantities of cases. In these hierarchies, the supreme courts are the highest level of courts. The essential role of the courts in the society is to protect the constitutional rights through hearing disputes and upholding of the law.
The Role of The Prosecution Legal Team
The Prosecution team comprises the legal party that is tasked with the presentation of a case during a criminal trial against an individual who has been accused on account of offending the law. In the ordinary situation, the prosecution team is a representative of the government administration in the case that has been brought against the standing accused (Hazard, Hodes, & Jarvis, 2014).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The prosecution attorney heads the prosecution team, and his/she must investigate crimes in unison with the law enforcement agencies (Hazard, Hodes, & Jarvis, 2014). The prosecution attorney should have contact with the accused aspect of crime, the offender, and the witness. Together, they conduct preliminary investigations and should they gather tangible evidence, they should bring it into the court. Whenever the offense is minor, and the offenders admit their guild, the prosecuting attorney should admit the guilt and impose a fine (Hazard, Hodes, & Jarvis, 2014). All this while, Hazard, Hodes, & Jarvis (2014) state that the initiation of action makes it probable for a trial in the court of law. Here, it is the persecutor's opportunity to question the suspect, witnesses and the experts to establish whether the suspect is innocent or guilty.
The Role of the Prosecution And Their Hypothesis To A Casefile Example
In the case involving two teenagers Tim Barns and Jack Carter, the case is a criminal offense since it entails the murder of two boys they have been accused of kidnapping and killing. Over the same issue, the prosecutors should not have immunity from unethical and unlawful decisions. In the case, Tim and Jack have been accused merely because of their purported “belief” in the presumption that they carried out the harmful actions of kidnapping and murdering their victims. The prosecution attorneys failed their mandate in the first place when they did not diagnose the witchcraft accusation from the account of the witnesses who claimed that they were listening to heavy metallic Rock music and that they were heavily tattooed. Well, it is not also the duty of the prosecution to seek neutrality over such types of case files. It is a fact that accused witches are not favored by history, as they have predominantly been executed by hanging and burning at stake throughout history. The prosecution, therefore, failed its mandate when it did not correctly diagnose the murder charge of Tim and Carter. The process of investigation was marred by the evidence of cult activity for the teenagers due to the outlook of the teenagers, but the prosecution attorneys committed a grave mistake of being convinced even after the police pressed Jack, into a confession without the due written permission from Jack’s parents to enable the police officers to conduct the interview. The defense attorney who took up the case pro bono should, therefore, be credited since this case displayed such a failure from the persecution attorneys who did not include the opinion and the findings of the expatriates like DNA evidence which could have accurately tied the defendants to the case of crime. Indeed, this is a case which displays a total failure from the persecution attorney’s office.
Jury Decision
In the court, the jury is tasked with listening to the evidence during a trial and making their verdict based on the evidence that has been established. According to Lynch (2014), the jury has to draw inferences from the facts that form the basis for their decision. The jury is therefore tasked with deciding whether a defendant is “guilty” or “not guilty” in a criminal case. Regarding civil cases, Lynch, (2014), states that the jury determines whether an accused party is ‘liable” or “not liable” in the civil case. A jury is comprised of 12 jurors, and in any criminal trial, the jury verdict has to be unanimous, meaning all the 12 jurors have to agree in unison with a decision based on the evidence and facts tabled (Lynch, 2014). The jurisdiction from the jury should be independent without the direction from the lawyers or the judge. The jury service is therefore very significant since the jurors are part of the court, and their service is a high duty of citizenship. Jurors aid in the upholding of justice among their fellow citizens hence they maintain law and order.
The Importance Of The Jury In America
Juries are a significant part of the justice system in America, and it is a pillar of the American democratic system. Lynch, (2014) state that the American constitution guarantees Americans a right to a fair trial that is overseen by a neutral jury, indeed, this creates confidence in the `American justice system. The other reasons why the Jury is essential to the American system is that it enables the Americans to give back to their country just as the veterans who give back to the country when they serve in the military (Lynch, 2014). Lynch, (2014) state that those who serve in the jury also support the American justice system. Besides, the US society is stronger when citizens serve on a jury. Lastly, the jury prevents absolute power by the politicians and corporations through the just verdict that they enforce.
The jury is protected by Article Three Section Two of the Constitution hence the criminal jury is an institution (Lynch, 2014). Everyone is entitled to the right to a fair trial from the time of America’s founding, and this is the most valued of all of America’s civil rights. The juries are therefore valued for their ability to check the abuse of power by the presidents, legislatures, and the judges (Lynch, 2014). The jury can find therefore the best mechanism of repealing legislative, judicial, and executive acts for the sake of fairness. The jury is, therefore, a preserve of America’s democracy.
Appeal
An appeal implies that one of the parties can request that the decision in a case can be looked at again by a higher court (Bennett & Feldman, 2015). It implies that something was wrong with the initial decision and that is should be changed. In this case, the two defendants successfully appealed their convictions based on new evidence. In their original trial, they admitted that the prosecutor might have had sufficient evidence to support their elements of the crime, even though they did not acknowledge that they committed the crime. Also though they were sentenced to 3 years in prison, they were released since they had served six years already. The implication here forthwith is that the prosecution defense did not do their work correctly during the trial. During the initial conviction, they based their decision based on an unreasonable verdict that was supported by little evidence. In precise, the judge made an error of law and procured a miscarriage of justice. Indeed, Bennett & Feldman (2015) state that this leads to the proper investigation on the reason why people harbor negative impressions. First, it entails their negative value if they are underestimated based on their negative performance, next is their lack of proper technical skill, and the last aspect entails the political stance that makes the judicial professionals not get the respect they deserve from the public.
Reasons That A Defendant May Have For Favoring A Plea Bargain Versus That of A Prosecutor
There are various reasons why a defendant may consider a plea bargain in a criminal case. Batra (2015) state that several defendants have the opportunity to negotiate a plea bargain, in part since criminal courts are overcrowded, implying that judges and prosecutors feel increased pressure to move cases through the system quickly. The Alford Pleas should, therefore, be permitted based on the substantive approach since sentencing a defendant to a shorter time in prison eases the overcrowding of the prisons, and this is a long-term strategy of realigning the system and alleviating the problem of lack of enough rooms within the jails.
Conclusion
The Legal system is part judicial branch of the American government is so significant since it complements the other two branches of government. The judicial branch enables the executive to interpret the law and enforce the law by punishing the offenders of the law. Justice enhances the responsibilities of each American hence it is vital to discuss the issues that impact the system with the aim of creating a bright future for America’s democratic pillar.
References
Batra, R. R. (2015). Judicial Participation in Plea Bargaining: A Dispute Resolution Perspective. Ohio St. LJ, 76, 565.
Bennett, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (2014). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom: Justice and judgment in American culture. Quid Pro Books.
Hazard, G. C., Hodes, W. W., & Jarvis, P. R. (2014). Law of Lawyering. Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
Lynch, G. E. (2014). Our administrative system of criminal justice. Fordham L. Rev., 83, 1673.
