Trial

In the determining a criminal case there are various processes that are taken in a court of law.

· The first step involves determination of whether or not a suspect is alleged to appearing before a court of law. Not every person can appear before a court of law. Therefore the court has to carry out some determination processes. The processes include

1. Stage one. The judge decides whether or not to send the accused to a psychiatric assessment. If need be a mental assessment is organized.

2. Stage two. The psychiatrist assesses the accused’s current mental state which occurs can happen in a hospital or a court room. The psychiatrist then writes a report depending on his assessment on whether the person can that be charged in a court of law.

3. Stage three. The judge makes a decision on whether the accused will appear in a court of law depending on the psychiatrist’s report.

· Once standing is confirmed, the court administers pre-trial management procedures. The pre-trials encourage settlement and help in solving the issues. Trial management orders and directions are obtained like notices which are crucial in the proceedings.

· Pre-trial procedures are crucial in justice administration in that they give an opportunity for both parties that is the respondent and the defendant to respond to each other’s statements (Justin, Levinson & Danielle Young, 2010).

· During a trial in a court of law the following procedure is used;

I. Opening statements. At this stage, the statements from both parties are read out to inform the court on what to expect from the evidence. The prosecution then calls the witnesses and introduces them to the court. The purpose of this stage is to introduce the case and give an overview on what will be revealed at the end of the trial.

II. Direct examination. During direct examination, the prosecutor questions the witnesses in support to their claim or defense. The purpose of this stage is to provide evidence in the ongoing case.

III. Cross examination. This stage entails questioning a witness by the opposing party during a trial. This helps in evaluating the truth of the testimony.

IV. Jury instructions. During a jury examination, the judge instructs the jury on the different laws that can be applied to the case. The purpose of this stage is to ensure that there is justice in the case.

V. Jury deliberations. This involves the decisions of the court. The jurors have to agree for a case to be finalized. This stage ensures there is freedom from all the jurors to present their opinions.

VI. Verdict rendering. Ones the decision is made then it is presented in a court of law as the final verdict.

VII. Sentencing. If the verdict found the suspect guilty he may be sentenced or another date is set for sentence. This stage ensures that there is a clear follow up of the law and marks the final step of the case unless an appeal is filed.

The criminal defendant has a right to appeal in high court or a supreme court depending on the state rules (Nancy S. Marder, 2010). In most cases, an appeal is accepted if the party feels that the evidence presented was not viable enough.

Annotated bibliography

Young S. Kim, Gregg Barak & Donald E. Shelton, (2009). Examining the "CSI-Effect" in the Cases of Circumstantial Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony: Multivariate and Path Analyses, 37 Journal of Criminal Justice 452.

The study is presented by qualified authors who are aimed at identifying the so-called "CSI-effect" on circumstantial evidence and eye-witness testimonies. The research was carried out involving 1,027 citizens who have ever been summoned for jury duty. Questionnaires were formulated which asked various questions like if they would be willing to convince a defendant grounded only on incidental evidence with no scientific evidence; and if they would be ready to convict a defendant with only the eye-witness testimony and no scientific evidence. The results were that exposure to CSI dramas does not affect the jurors’ conviction. Those jurors expecting too much on scientific evidence were not willing to convict defendants with accidental evidence only. The policy states that jurors ought to obtain scientific evidence and the attorneys ought to be concerned about the conviction of their clients without scientific evidence with the presence of the eye-witness.

Justin D. Levinson & Danielle Young, (2010). Different Shades of Bias: Skin Tone, Implicit Racial Bias, and Judgments of Ambiguous Evidence, 112 West Virginia Law Review 307

The authors of this article are interested in identifying physical differences of individuals that hinder fair judgment by the judges. In this article, the authors convey a new assumption which is the Biased Evidence Hypothesis, which speculates that when jurors are presented with tribal groupings, those judges spontaneously and involuntarily estimate vague trial suggestion in racially-biased ways. From the review, legal and social factors indicate that people understand the racial biases. In the study, there were photos showing various crime scenes of a dark-skinned male while the other half showed a photograph of a light-skinned male. The participants were then presented with a list of evidence that could be used to determine either culpability or innocence and were later asked to categorize the evidence as guilty or innocence. Results showed that observers viewed the dark male as guilty while the light-skinned male as innocent. The authors suggest that more experimental evidence is required to test Biased Evidence Hypothesis.

Nancy S. Marder, (2010), Instructing the Jury, in The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law.

The author of the book is concerned with identifying the application of language and law in the court of law. The book uses different research methods to analyze and compile the results. There are various problems that are identified that help to understand the jury instructions. One major problem identified is the use of language in the jury. She identifies that the language used is complex and requires legal knowledge to understand. The author outlines various steps that can be implemented to improve juror comprehension of the jury instructions. Some of them include giving them a written copy, allowing them to ask questions for clarity and also using clear terms for all. Some of the reasons given by the author may not apply in court, however, there is need to improve on language to ensure that the jurors are able to follow up the proceedings.

Michael Bromby, The Temptation to Tweet—Jurors' Activities Outside the Trial

This article analyzes jurors' behavior on the social media most especially on Twitter. The author is concerned whether the jury “tweet” about the jury services they provide. The author conducted vast researches by finding the number of tweets made by different jurors from their Twitter sites. He then selected ten accounts that he will be following on daily bases. To my view ten accounts are not reliable enough to give a comprehensive report. The author ought to have followed more jurors in order to get reliable results. From the results of the author he found out that at least every day every juror tweets on jury service.

Newman, D. J. (2006). Conviction: The determination of guilt or innocence without trial

The author of the book focuses on discussing the main considerations and organizations affecting the administration of justice. The author starts by giving a very clear explanation on the various laws used in the administration of justice. A debate on judicial review is offered in terms of American political history and opinions, and limitations on judicial power and effectiveness are explored. Sixteen basic maxims of judicial self-restraint are also presented and explained. The author comprehensively researched for his study from various courts in America. He also identified various procedures that are used to monitor the courts, their existence and closure. The author suggests that there is a need for the development of more courts to avoid congestions in the courts.

Erin York Cornwell & Valerie P. Hans, (2007) Contextualizing Jury Participation: Case-, Jury-, and Juror-Level Predictors of Participation in Jury Deliberations

The author of the book aims at identifying how jury participation is carried out. He was motivated by the rumors that jury deliberations were dominated by members of a social class mostly the white males. The book uses effective data collection methods in their research. The results were that in jury participation there was discrimination in terms of participation and decision making by the jury due to class and gender. Most surprisingly, black jurors reported high levels of participation, regardless of whether they were the majority or minority on a jury. The most registered cases were on class issues where the white dominated the dark.

References

Erin York Cornwell & Valerie P. Hans, (2007) Contextualizing Jury Participation: Case-, Jury-, and Juror-Level Predictors of Participation in Jury Deliberations

Justin D. Levinson & Danielle Young, Different Shades of Bias: Skin Tone, Implicit Racial Bias, and Judgments of Ambiguous Evidence, 112 West Virginia Law Review 307 (2010)

Newman, D. J. (2006). Conviction: The determination of guilt or innocence without trial

Michael Bromby, The Temptation to Tweet—Jurors' Activities Outside the Trial

Nancy S. Marder, (2010), Instructing the Jury, in The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law.

Young S. Kim, Gregg Barak & Donald E. Shelton, (2009). Examining the "CSI-Effect" in the Cases of Circumstantial Evidence and Eyewitness Testimony: Multivariate and Path Analyses, 37 Journal of Criminal Justice 452.