Diversity Issues in Criminal Justice – Chapter 11 Courts and Multiculturalism

First Peer’s Post:

Identify and discuss the steps of a trial. 

 

The steps of a trial are:

· Jury selection

· Opening statements

· Presentation of evidence 

· Closing arguments 

· Judge’s charge of jury

· Jury deliberations

· Verdict

· Sentencing if verdict is guilty

 

Which step do you believe involves the greatest area of controversy with regard to discrimination? Why? 

 

Jury selection involves the greatest area of controversy with regard to discrimination. Why? The biased selection of jurors and unethical jury behavior have unfortunately hampered the effectiveness of jury trials. For instance, we sometimes hear statements such as “he was convicted by an all-white jury,” suggesting that race may have impacted the jury’s decision. Controversy with regard to jury selection and multiculturalism exists primarily in the manner in which potential jurors are identified and the process of questioning prospective jurors known as voir dire.

 

While both the prosecution and the defense have the right to an impartial jury, The Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the right of a criminal defendant to a jury selection process that is free from racial, ethnic, or gender discrimination.

 

Identify how judicial, prosecutorial, and defense attorney discretion influences the outcome of court cases. 

 

Discretion is the latitude granted officials to act under a formal set of rules and in a public capacity. 

 

Judicial discretion refers to a judge’s power to make a decision based on his or her individualized evaluation, guided by the principles of law. Judicial discretion gives courts immense power which is exercised when legislature allows for it.

 

Judges usually have substantial discretion in sentencing. Most states give them considerable leeway in choosing between probation and imprisonment, in setting the term of imprisonment under either an indeterminate or determinate sentencing structure, in deciding whether an offender will be given the special benefits of offender statute, and in determining whether to impose consecutive or concurrent sentences of multiple conviction.

 

Prosecutorial discretion is when a prosecutor has the power to decide whether or not to charge a person for a crime, and which criminal charges to file. This is a rather broad power that also gives prosecutors the authority to enter into plea bargains with a defendant, which can result in the defendant pleading guilty to a lesser charge or receiving a lesser sentence for pleading guilty to the original charge

 

Prosecutors may have a variety of reasons for using prosecutorial discretion. One reason that a prosecutor may decide not to file charges against a defendant is a lack of evidence. A prosecutor has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any charges they file against a defendant, so if the evidence isn’t there or it’s shaky, they may decide against filing the charges.

 

Popular understanding, drawn from case law, is that the discretion exercised by defense attorneys is, in key respects, very different. Lawyers is any sector of practice have substantial discretion in pursuing clients’ goals. That is a large part of what it means to be a professional—to take on a client’s task but to largely control the route to achieving it. Hence, the defense attorney has comparable leeway to make strategic decisions about matters including case theory.

 

The reality is that defense attorneys’ discretion about the level of commitment to give each case—call it case commitment—is much more similar to prosecutors; than it is different. Defense attorneys cannot choose to forgo a case completely in the way that prosecutors can choose not to prosecute a crime, but they can come close.

 

How are jurors selected? 

 

The right to jury trial for a serious criminal charge is guaranteed by the Constitution. Juries are also guaranteed in certain civil matters at the federal level and in most states. A jury is charged with finding the facts of the case after carefully reviewing the evidence and deliberating. 

 

States and counties maintain lists of citizens for possible jury selection. These lists are a compilation of information from the Department of Motor Vehicles, voter registrations, and other sources that would provide a list of potential jurors’ names. From the compilation, names are randomly drawn.

 

Does this process seem fair to you? Discuss why or why not?

 

I do not believe that jury selection is fair (depending on the jurisdiction). Why? Although Supreme Court decisions have held that discrimination in peremptory challenges based on race is prohibited, there remain questions as to whether these standards truly exist in the jury selection process. Current study fails to find sufficient evidence that jurors believe that racial bias have an impact upon their ability to serve on juries and failed to establish a relationship between views about racial representation on juries and system fairness. It did, however, find that a significant minority of jurors questioned the racial neutrality of the system, which in turn decreased perceptions of system fairness. 

 

In order to have a fair jury, both the prosecution and the defense can request the dismissal of potential jurors who show bias during the selection process. Thus, a prosecutor can legitimately seek dismissal of a potential juror who is likely biased and probably won’t be impartial, regardless of that person’s race, ethnicity, or gender. 

 

Nevertheless, a potential juror’s immaturity, lack of respect for authority, and lack of life experience are legitimate bases for peremptory challenges.

 

Are racial and ethnic minorities adequately represented among the courtroom personnel? 

 

I do not believe racial and ethnic minorities are adequately represented among courtroom personnel. Racial and ethnic bias have no place in the courts or anywhere in the justice system. Eliminating such bias and ensuring its absence is the keystone of equal justice. Eliminating bias involves not just dispensing with systems or procedures or letting go of individuals with a bad attitude, but including some affirmative steps and commitment or resources as well.

 

Eliminating bias from the courts and other aspects of the justice system is critical. This country and the rights and obligations of all who live here are defined by law—the Constitution and laws passed by Congress, states, and localities. If bias exists in the operation of this system for the enforcement and protection of rights, then a corruption exists that goes to the foundation of the nation. Therefore, this elimination of bias is not an exercise in political correctness; it is of fundamental and structural importance to viability of our system of government. 

 

Courts should undertake the exercise of self-examination to identify actual prejudice, discrimination, and those practices that appear discriminatory. This exercise salutary in and of itself. Effective outreach and a willingness to listen and self-examine bring people into the system and create a confidence in the interest, concern, and goodwill of the system. We must be ready to work together to redesign those aspects that have operated in a discriminatory, exclusionary, or otherwise unfair way.

 

If not, what steps could be taken to diversify the courts?

 

Here are some concrete steps. We should communicate the importance of diversity throughout the legal system, fully fund diversity and inclusion initiatives, and shift the culture through sensitivity training. We should build a network of diversity for recruiting and hiring, so that people of color are part of the candidate pool for judicial vacancies and other senior roles. We also must have support from the public at large, and the private sector, to support diversity in the justice system and throughout the legal profession.

Second Peer’s Post

In a criminal trial, there are steps that are needed to be followed. Such steps include, Jury selection, Opening statements, Presentation of evidence, closing arguments, judge's charge of  jury, jury deliberation, verdict, sentencing if verdict is "guilty". l think the greatest controversy in these steps in regards to discrimination is Jury selection. As one has the right to the Jury of his or her peer. That raises a tough question on how that should be selected. 

Prosecutors have the right to decide who to charge with a crime, what to file and when to drop the charges. They have the power to allow or deny a plea bargain. Defense attorney has the influence to help prove that the innocence of their client. And the Judge has the power to look at all the provided evidence and decide who is innocent or guilty. 

The process of jurors selection is called Venire. Is lists are compiled from voters registration and drivers license. They are summoned to the courtrooms if they are qualified. However, this is mot fair because the low-income individuals and Minorities are less likely to be summoned because they are less likely to own a car or have a driver's license. 

Honesty, l think minorities and some ethnicity are not adequately represented in the courtroom. Because of the less diversity in the courtroom. The first thing we should do it put people of the less ethnic in the court rooms for example, Judges that are of the LGBTQ communities or people in a minority background. But one might think that would cause biasness in the courtroom because they would rule in favor of the said group but rather that would bring a more understanding of their other's point of views.