Courtroom

Courtroom
Courtroom Participation
Lumengo McGhee –Houston
CJA/224
November 24, 2010
Bruce Cartwright Sr.
Courtroom Participation
The defense attorney represents the defendant, the person accused of committing a crime or a
wrongful act. Criminal defendants who are unable to come up with the money for to hire a lawyer
are allowed to have the judge appoint them a lawyer who is then paid with public funds. The
courtroom deputy or courtroom clerk administers the oaths to the witnesses, marks the exhibits, and
generally helps keep the trial running efficiently. The courtroom deputy is employed by the clerk of
the court. The clerk of the court is selected by all of the active judges on the court and works closely
with the chief ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
When the grievance is filed, the clerk of court assigns it, generally by random rotation, to the judge
who will hold all matters related to that case until it is determined or closed.
A criminal case may begins when a legal representative for the federal government, the U.S.
attorney or an assistant U.S. attorney, convenes a federal grand jury and presents it with evidence or
information that indicates that a specific person committed a crime. Only crimes that engage federal
laws are tried in federal court, such as bank robberies, serious drug law violations, securities law
cases, or damage to federal property. If the grand jury believes there is enough evidence to show
that the person in all probability committed the crime, it issues an indictment. Following the
indictment, the court may summon the accused to appear in court, or it may authorize a U.S.
marshal or federal peace officer to arrest the defendant. The defendant is brought before either a
judge or a magistrate judge, at an indictment and is asked to plead "guilty" or "not guilty." If the
defendant pleads "guilty," the judicial police officer will set a time for sentencing. If the defendant
pleads "not guilty," the judicial officer will set a date for trial. Most of the time lawyers may ask the
court to rule on the admissibility of substantiation or to make a conclusion on other case–related
issues before the case can proceed to
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Essay Courtroom Observsation
"You be the Judge"
Week 5 Courtroom Observation Paper Research
BUSI 301 Liberty University
Indiana Northern District Court
Judges: Chief Justice Raymond, Brown, Uphold, Batten, Grambo, Wray, Bryant, Cross and Allen
Case Number: 80a14–5352–vc804
Plaintiff: Debora White
Plaintiff Representatives: Ashley Gavin and Jackson Riley
Defendant: O'Malley's Tavern and Patrick Gibbs
Defendant Representatives: Xander Barden and Katelyn Lippa
Defendant Council Overview:
Xander Barden and Katelyn Lippa are the defendant's (O'Malley's Tavern and Patrick Gibbs)
representatives they are recommending the Court present an outline verdict to the bartender, John
Daniels and O'Malley's Tavern. There is definite ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Norris case which was brought up in the courtroom; Mr. Hard was not as drunk. (Ashlock v. Norris,
475 N.E.2d 1167, 1170 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985). The bartender, Mr. John Daniels did not have any
definite awareness of Mr. Hard's intoxication. Mr. Daniels is not able to recall any unusual behavior
that was displayed by Mr. Hard. He does not have any reclamation of observing Mr. Edward Hard
tripping over the pool stick because he had stepped away from the room. He did witness an
argument start at the entrance doorway between Mr. Bruno White and Mr. Edward Hard in which
Mr. Hard provoked. There were no additional drinks served after the altercation took place, the final
alcoholic beverage had been ordered and served prior to the incident and therefore is not said to be
actual knowledge. The last drink is the cutoff point for the statue and where the definite ruling
intervenes. The process is in order to try and obtain an abstract opinion from Mr. John Daniels
stating that he had no familiarity of Mr. Hard being drunk. When Mr. Edward Hard left the
O'Malley's Tavern he followed Mr. Bruno White in a careless manner, damaging numerous vehicles
and consequently hitting Mr. White's automobile and killing him. The direct aim of Mr. Hard is
being safeguarded with the implication of a motor vehicle accident while being intoxicated. The
understanding and cause of the intoxication is not what is relevant, however the altercation that
occurred at

Identity In Courtroom
Much research has investigated the role of gender (Ehrlich 2006, Feinstein 2001, Montague 2013,
Walters 1994) and gendered language (Chapman 1993, Hublar 2015) in courtrooms, focusing
particularly on witnesses and jurors or written law. Attention has also been paid to the language of
women lawyers and the gendered constructions of their professional identities (Bahm 1993, Bogoch
1999, Cech 2015), especially since the number of women in this profession has increased
considerably in recent times. The assumption in these studies, as is in the present, is that social
identity is not fixed but rather created and constructed, or performed as Butler and others would say,
in the process of communication.
The courtroom, in fact, has been identified as an important place in which power relations and social
identity are constructed, realized and negotiated (Bahm, 1993, Ehrlich 2006, Maley 1994) and
where suspicions and findings of gender inequalities have surfaced repeatedly (Mey, 1985). Even in
the highly regulated form of the courtroom discourse, the shaping of social identity is often realized
through language. Since specific institutional contexts of the discourse tend to legitimate and prefer
certain types of talk over others (Gal, 1995), and in the case of courtrooms ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Modeling on Bogoch's (1999) methodology, this study will look at transcript of trials with a focus
on terms of address, intrusions, and comments directed from the court to the lawyer who is currently
holding the speaking turn, but will also focus on the language of the lawyers as they interact with
the witnesses and will allow for new categories to emerge from the analysis

Courtroom Work Group
Courtroom Work Group
There are many parts of the courtroom and the process of convicting a criminal. The courtroom
work group has a major role in convicting and finalizing a case. In the courtroom work group, there
are three groups of people that hold the entire courtroom together. Without the work group, the
courtroom would not flow, and coming to a conclusion to the case would not be as easy. The work
group is made up of the Judge, the Defense Counsel and the Prosecution. They work together to
reach a result, in the case by staying in contact on a daily basis. There are many roles in the work
group, and if they are not all followed through with then the results could be different than what
they should be. In this paper, we will ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Then we have the local court administrator; they facilitate the courts to function in a smooth way
and court management. The court reporter and court clerks, the court reporter, type's everything that
is said in court, the courts want to keep accurate accounts of what is said, not only that, they used
the transcripts for certain court cases as examples. Then the courts handle the courts pleas, motions
and maintain a record of all the cases. All these people cross path each and every day in the courts,
they ensure that all parties are being respected and that no law is being abused by either party. The
only thing I would change in the handling of the data by local authorities and the prosecuting office,
they should ensure that all data is obtained legally.
The Role of the Prosecution
The role of the prosecutor boils down to three main goals. The prosecutor is responsible for
investigating the crime committed, decide whether or not to proceed with legal proceeding, and
finally, if legal proceedings are instigated to appear in court.
The prosecutor has more contact with everyone involved with the crime than maybe anyone else. He
or she has contact with the person suspected of the crime, the victim, witnesses, and also works
alongside the police to investigate and ensure the correct person is held accountable.
Once all the evidence is gathered up, he or she will decide whether or not to legally pursue

Courtroom Observation Paper
On April 10th, 2017 I, Cherise Dugger, observed the proceedings of multiple criminal hearings in
the Aztec District Court in the courtroom of Judge Bradford J. Dalley. It was here that I observed
out of my element as a dance instructor and mother and became part of the audience of the court.
Being unacquainted with court proceedings, I directed myself towards the back of the courtroom in
order to gain a full perspective of the hearing.
A man from the adult detention center wearing hand and ankle cuffs was escorted in by the guard.
As a male Native American, gender and racial discrimination are very common. Gender is defined
as being "the culturally and socially constructed differences between females and males found in the
meanings, beliefs, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These are "strongly held norms with moral and ethical connotations that may not be violated
without serious consequences in a particular culture" (Kendall, 2017, p. 69). Not only did this man
break the law, but because the victim was his daughter he broke "social mores so strong that their
violation is considered to be extremely offensive and even unmentionable" (Kendall, 2017, p. 69),
otherwise known as taboo. Sexual assault violates mores, but sexually assaulting your daughter is
taboo. Judge Dalley informed him that he would have to register as a sex offender and provide
information including his name, date of birth, address, and place of

Courtroom Testimony Essay
VICTIMIZED CHILDREN Herrgott 6
Courtroom testimony work to protect the child from having to physically appear in the courtroom,
as the setting may serve to be unfamiliar and terrifying, as the abuser may be present. A child's
testimony may be taken by a two–way closed circuit television, or may occur pre–trial. Therefore,
the child is not forced to be in the presence of the perpetrator, or before a courtroom filled with
unfamiliar faces. Confidentiality in child sexual abuse cases is crucial, as families value their
privacy and would prefer to begin the healing process away from the public's eye. Therefore, Code §
3509 demands that all Court documents that include the name of the victim or witness must be
stored in a secure area, and are not to be disclosed to any individuals who are not involved in the
case. With the identity of the victim kept confidential, the needs of the child are met by a multi–
disciplinary child abuse team. Such a team "consists of dedicated professionals representing many
facets of the government and private sectors including police officers, prosecutors, medical
professionals, caseworkers, and therapists" (U.S Department, 2017). Under Code § 3509, the team
works side–by–side to prevent any additional trauma from being inflicted upon the child, and may
aid in the healing process further down the road. By having such teams available to the victim and
the victim's family, the legal process becomes a less of a burden for the victim, and becomes
oriented around the severe and swift punishment of the offender.
Once the verdict is delivered and the legal process is complete, victims of child sexual abuse are left
with a long and arduous road to healing. For those victims who did not report their exploitation as a
child, they may not receive the same help as they would have if the Court became involved. These
unreported survivors may grow older and believe that since the abuse occurred in their childhood,
they would rather not dig up the past and bring such trauma into the
VICTIMIZED CHILDREN Herrgott 7 light. Many victims may go through life with unresolved
emotional issues, and may never be able to form trusting and intimate relationships with

Taking a Look at Australian Courtrooms
Australian courtrooms are highly ritualised spaces where various long serving customs and
traditions are strictly followed in order to constitute events of power, and also featured in the
relative power relations. As was evident by the local courtrooms visited within The Downing
Centre, the architecture, language, courtroom actors and spatial organisation demonstrate the
numerous levels of power, of which are present. This usage of power is evident as visible through
the relationships between the courtroom actors, particularly those between the judge or magistrate,
the witnesses and lastly, the lawyers. These relations significantly highlight the disparity of power
between these individuals. Simultaneously, the courtroom architecture of which is present also
signals and represents the different levels of power during court proceedings. In addition, the use of
legal jargon in one's favour is also a worthy indicator of attaining this much sought after power
aforementioned.
Within a courtroom, power relations are revealed at their greatest extent, in the instances of the
interaction between the different courtroom actors. During the observation of a particular criminal
case, it became clear to myself that the chain of power in a courtroom features the judge or
magistrate at the top, followed by the lawyer (or defendant if they are representing themselves),
with the witnesses and defendants at the bottom. This form of power distribution further exemplifies
the ritualistic

On Monday February 8, 2016, I was assigned to Judge El Amin's courtroom (courtroom 5). At
approximately 0945 hours, my assistance was no longer needed in courtroom 5. Therefore, at
approximately 1000 hours, I entered Judge Crawford's courtroom (courtroom 6) in order to assist
with the transporting of juveniles to and from the holding cells, etc.
Upon entering the courtroom, I observed Deputy W. Pettaway walking toward me with a handcuffed
subject in his custody. The subject was identified as Amarre Lilly (an adult) who was being arrested
on a Failure to Appear Warrant (15J04398). As Amarre Lilly approached the door leading to the
detention area he began using profanity and was at that point admonished for his demeanor and use
of profanity within the courtroom by Judge Crawford.
Then, Detention Officer Alexander and I ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After arriving in the Intake Area, I came into contact with Corporal S. Williams, who assisted me in
escorting Amarre Lily toward the holding cells. Subsequently, Amarre Lily became progressively
angrier then attempted to snatch and run away from me. At that juncture, Corporal S. Williams
requested custody of Amarre Lily and I immediately handed him over Corporal S. Williams.
Nevertheless, Amarre Lily continued to resist efforts to control him and when I attempted to walk by
Amarre Lily kicked me with a roundhouse style kick, in the thigh area of my right and left leg. After
being kicked I immediately caught Amarre Lily's foot and with the assistance of Corporal S.
Williams I carefully lowered him to the floor. Then, Detention Officers Battiste and Alexander
helped us maintain control over Amarre Lily while he was being searched for weapons and placed in
leg restraints by Deputy A.

Thesis On Courtroom Argumentation
This dissertation takes courtroom argumentation as a form of practical argumentation whose
purpose is "to gain the assent or adherence of the audience to a claim." (Sanders 2006). Drawing on
Martin's (2008) notion of affiliation from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistics
(hereafter SFL), the dissertation investigates the similar ways through which public prosecutors and
defense lawyers seek for bonding in the legal field as well as how they use different experience–
infused values in achieving affiliation in the discourse of courtroom argumentation. 如果研究的是
控辩双方的法律身份及其与法官的结盟，是不是与论文题目有些脱节，或联系的不是很紧密
This introductory chapter will briefly present the orientation, assumptions and methodologies of the
dissertation to foreground the subsequent chapters. We start this chapter by introducing rationale
and background of the research in Section 1.1 and ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
To date, courtroom argumentation studies have become a meeting point for scholars from forensics,
linguistics, psychology and many other disciplines. Generally speaking, in line with Aristotle's
argumentation theory (2007), which emphasises on the trichotomy of logic, dialectic and rhetoric,
there are three distinguished approaches to courtroom argumentation studies: the logical, the
dialogical and the rhetorical. The logical approach sees arguments as the product of the activity of
arguing; the dialectical approach takes argumentation as a procedure consisting of strategic
movements by a proponent and an opponent; the rhetorical approach considers argumentation as a
communicative

Courtroom Reflection
Through this assignment I have gained insight and applied ample knowledge that I learned in the
classroom to the courtroom. Through my various experiences in multiple court room settings I
witnessed everything from an individual in municipal court driving without a license just so he
could get Whataburger, owners of an apartment complex with 161 fire violations totaling over
$2,000 in fines and tickets, an environmental safety court, and finally ending with a preliminary
hearing of murder in the first degree, along with two counts of drive by shooting, and a felon in
possession of a firearm. Out of all my court room experiences, the one that I learned the most in was
the preliminary hearing which was CF 17–3297, State vs. Jose. The preliminary trial was held for
Jose Mascote, with Judge Kevin McCoy residing. Mascote's defending attorney was Mike Arnett
and the Assistant District Attorney, Dan Gridley, was present on behalf of the state. During this
hearing I was truly able to grasp the notion that with all preliminary hearings and trials the lawyers
use their words, witnesses, and evidence to paint a story in your mind of the scenario that occurred.
We were able to observe a total of 13 witnesses called to the stand by the state attorney. Since this
was a preliminary hearing most of the information that the witnesses testified about was to verify
that the events did occur, that the states exhibits were viable, and to prove that there is good intent
for an actual trial. The very first witness was the owner of a business called ID Solutions located
near the crossroads of 38th and Robinson. This witness was actually tied to the states exhibit 1 and
2. States exhibit 1 was a bird eyes google view of the business and nearby crossing intersections, to
which the witness verified during examination. States exhibit 2 was surveillance video that shows
shots being fired at the victim out of a blue Dodge Avenger. The second witness called to the stand
was allegedly walking down the street to the Buy for Less by 39th and Shields with his pregnant
cousin when the defendant reportedly drove by and made threatening comments. According to the
witness the defendant then shot out of the passenger side window at him before

Tweeting From Courtroom
Essay (30 points)
Using online databases, research the issue of tweeting from court. After learning the pros and con
surrounding the issue, write a 600–word opinion piece arguing either for or against allowing that
particular use of technology in court. Be sure to cite specific examples of cases (instances) where
tweeting was an issue.
Tweeting from courtroom is a method of reporting that is growing in popularity (Lozare, 2011).
Twitter can facilitate the transfer of information due to its simple interface and its popularity among
social media user. Using Twitter, reporters can conveniently provide quick updates and report some
interesting observations that might not show up in their articles (Lozare, 2011).
Regardless of its potential benefits, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Opponents of this issue argued that the possibility of a tweet to go viral might lead to mistrials and
contempt citations ("Reporters' live tweeting from court risks mistrials", 2011). This is likely to
happen when journalists cross the line of reporting as they attempt to fit as many information as
possible within a short time frame and limited number of characters.
Considering the focus of this debate, it appears that one of the most important aspects of tweeting
from courtroom is the lack of editorial oversight. (Tweeting from courtrooms, 2012). Although this
situation might benefits the public through the lack of censorship, it has its fair share of
shortcomings too.
An example of the disadvantage of the lack of editorial oversight occurs when disturbing contents,
such as graphic evidence from a crime scene, are presented in the courtroom. Once content is
published on the Internet, it is often difficult to remove it the Internet. With the difficulty to decide
on appropriateness in a matter of seconds, tweeting from courts without editorial oversight might
cause some problems (Tweeting from courtrooms, 2012). For instance, journalists might
accidentally tweet something based on their opinion or prejudice rather than the fact, due to the fact
that they have to type their observation in real time. If this prejudice affects the public opinion, it
might harm the trial

Courtroom Oberservation Essay
Running head: Courtroom Observation
Courtroom Observation
Tracy D. Camden
Liberty University
BUSI 301
Robert Martin
April 23, 2011
This court case took place in United States District Court in the Northern District of Indiana. This is
court case number 82A04–8876–CB285, White vs. Patrick Gibbs and O'Malley's Tavern. The
lawyers in this case are Benjamin Walton, xxxxx Van Meter who represent the defendants Patrick
Gibbs and O'Malley's Tavern and Jackson Welch, Amanda Babot who represent the plaintiff Debbie
White. The defendants Patrick Gibbs and O'Malley's Tavern are seeking a summary judgment which
is a procedural device used during civil litigation to promptly and expeditiously resolve a ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
2 Corinthians 5:10
Proverbs 28:13 ESV / 22 helpful votes
Whoever conceals his transgressions will not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will
obtain mercy.
Deuteronomy 28:1–68 ESV / 12 helpful votes
"And if you faithfully obey the voice of the Lord your God, being careful to do all his
commandments that I command you today, the Lord your God will set you high above all the
nations of the earth. And all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, if you obey the
voice of the Lord your God. Blessed shall you be in the city, and blessed shall you be in the field.
Blessed shall be the fruit of your womb and the fruit of your ground and the fruit of your cattle, the
increase of your herds and the young of your flock. Blessed shall be your basket and your kneading
bowl. ...
This has always be a method for resolving disputes. Judges old testament. In the book of judges the
population used juges to resolve diputes. For now central government every man did what was right
in his own eyes. Judges 21:25 In those days there was no king in Israel 'every man did what was

right in his own eyes'. There was no central government and no indication of any national poliictal
capital. in Shiloh
Summary

Examples Of Courtroom Observation
On Thursday, February 2, 2017 I observed the Court of Common Pleas in Athens, Ohio for an hour
and a half. Overseen by Judge Pat Lang in "Courtroom B." I arrived to the courthouse around 8:55
a.m. I entered the building from the right side, underneath the stairs. To my immediate right, there
was an officer and a metal detector I had to walk through before coming any further. I put the loose
things I was carrying through the x–ray conveyor belt and collected them on the other side. I asked
the officer where Courtroom B was and he kindly directed me to the 3rd floor. I took the elevator to
the third floor and when the doors opened I walked out and to the left. There was one other person
on the floor at the time and sitting by the doors of courtroom B. It was very quiet in the building, I
walked through the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I went through the same security procedures as before upon entering. When I arrived, there was a
trial already in progress in courtroom B, but there were to be trials in both courtrooms that day. I
had a seat in the waiting area along with a handful of other people waiting to enter the courtroom or
to hear from their attorneys. Some people looked distressed and others were talking amongst
themselves. There were two women in the waiting area and a public defender came for each of
them. One of the women signed for a continuance and left the building. The other woman had to pay
a fine and she was also out pretty quickly. A few minutes passed and another public defender comes
to speak to two of his waiting clients, separate cases, but gets a continuance for both. In one case the
prosecutor did not show up. The defendant was arguing over the weight of the marijuana in the
possession charge and demands it gets weighed again. The other case the public defender declares
"The state made an offer, it is not what we want, so we'll come back to court again another day" and
sets a new court

Observation Of A Courtroom
Justice is essential in city court ruling, and it is the mandate of the judge to ensure that it prevails.
There are two main types of cases which can be presented in this court level, the civil and criminal
litigation. They are prevalent, and it requires the wits and intellect from the judge to determine the
circumstances reasonably. It is prudent for the judge and court officials to ensure that the right
procedures are observed when deciding a case in a court of law.
I was able to attend court proceedings at Guilderland Town Court on 19th October 2017. This court
is located at Guilderland Town Hall 1st Floor along 5209 Western Turnpike. I arrived at 5:30 pm
and noticed some security features in place. I went through the metal detectors, and I was instructed
to place my purse on the crates of the walkthrough. My bag was, however, not checked. Most of the
people going into the courthouse were not searched, but rather, the guards seemed to pick people at
random. My aim was to make observations in the courtroom so as to come up with an opinion as to
whether or not the system works.
The presiding judge at the courtroom was Judge Denise Randall. The courtroom had a traditional
touch with the wooden panels and podiums for the judge and the clerk. Nevertheless, the room was
bright and well–lit with white walls. The entire courtroom was filled with blue plastic chairs neatly
arranged in rows in a very orderly manner. Almost all the seats were taken, and the courtroom fully

Courtroom Irony
The irony of the judicial system within the courtroom is despite the traditional procedure providing
equality in justice being served fairly, the dominant physical and linguistic separation in relation to
the judge and the clients are used to increase their residing power over the ordinary people (Asma
1997). The superior use of knowledge and legal proceedings is used to manipulate the language in
order to establish control throughout the courtroom, particularly with the relationship between the
assertive judge and the guilty client. Many elements consisting of the courtroom's traditional
practices and rituals, place action in defining the authority of an individual and ultimately affects the
way in which they perform. This power presented ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
During the court observation, the hierarchal system in relation to the judge and the ordinary people
is recognised as it follows a strict procedural model from the spacing and placement of the people
and the general guidelines that is followed. This enables the formation of control, effectively
enforcing the power through accentuating the right behavioral code and courtroom proceedings in
aid of legal representation and reasoning. The use of intellectual language different from the client,
accentuates the mental separation and physical lack of power the client has in a courtroom.
Combining the language barrier and the strategic placement of the judge, it emphasizes the
traditional power relationship between the courtroom and the people inside. This result allows the
questioning of whether the hierarchal system of the judge's position allows for an equal final
judgment in accordance to justice being

Courtroom 302
Professor Chapleau
CJS
7 April 2013 Courtroom 203 My understanding of the court system has changed almost weekly
from the beginning of my semester. I do understand things that I never thought I would've have
known or even cared about in the least. The book Courtroom 302 has brought an even different side
of thinking into this. The book goes into detail about the criminal court in Chicago. He watches all
of the actions and different trials that come and go in the courtroom 302. He presents many different
cases throughout the book which gives more insight then just a single case. Overview of the book:
The book is written by Steve Bogira, who is a reporter for a newspaper is Chicago. He goes into the
courtroom 302 whose judge ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
One of the defendants actually states "Hey you good, Why aint you become a real lawyer" (p. 138).
They think because they are getting this for free that these people representing them don't have any
idea what they are doing because the one was so good at using the facts for his client is a good way
he got him acquitted. Throughout most of the book the judge of the courtroom is up for a retention
election. He is a circuit court judge and that means he has to do a partisan election and he must get
60% majority to keep his job on the bench. This makes a huge impact on some of the decisions
judges will make in the courtroom. During the trail of white men who were going trail over beating
a young black kid who was in their neighborhood. The judge was being affected harshly by this
because if he was easy on the men then the black community would vote against him because the
beating was racially motivated. On the other hand if he gives them a harsh sentence he could be
looked at bad because these men were first time offenders. He gets accused of rushing the case
because what he planned on doing was gives the one man who was the one who did the beating a
harsh sentences and give the others probation. He wanted to get it on the record that he gave him a
harsher sentence, and even after the sentence he was telling the media all about his reasoning for
why and how he came up with this decision. He ended up give

Court Observations In The Courtroom
On July 6, 2016, I was in department five for the court observation. Between 8:30 until around
11:30, there was not much happening within the department. Since the Judge had to be in three
different courtrooms during the morning, department five was just waiting for the judge to come in.
The people in the courtroom were the people who were waiting for their arraignment hearing in
front of Judge Lord. There were three different defense lawyers who were representing differently
clients who were waiting for their arraignment hearing. Nadim, I hope I am spelling her name right,
was the lawyer from the office. She was very helpful on explaining what was going on and the
different cases she had on her desk. When Judge lord was finished in the other departments, the
cases on the docket went by quickly. In a short amount of time the courtroom was empty and we left
to go to lunch. Most of the cases, which were heard, were follow–ups on past trails. There were a
handful of cases, which involved fines owed and programs needed to be complete. But, for the most
part the cases which by quickly and the judge left the courtroom to go into other courtroom to hear
more cases. The one thing which surprise me ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Robert showed us around the building and the role the employees have to protect citizens. He had
different employees talk to the group about what their station did in the larger running of ever day
operations. Not only did the fire surprised talked to us about the different codes which were read
and to how handle different calls, but also showed we came at a calm time. It might have been a
calm time while we were on the tour, there was a meeting going on to make sure the department
heads are ready for any situations, which might come up. It showed how the communication
building could be used as a place to house different people who might be needed if an emergency
comes

Cameras in the Courtroom Essay
Cameras in the Courtroom
By: Justin Taylor
MCJ 6257–08C–2, Criminal Courts and Professional Ethics
4–10–10
In the electronic world that we live in, every aspect of life can be broadcast across the country in
seconds. This aspect is even more realistic when cameras are front and center in American
courtrooms. Each morning and afternoon we turn on the television, reality television takes over and
civil lawsuits or divorces are being broadcast on shows such as the Judge Judy Show, Judge Brown
Show, Judge Greg Mathis Show or Divorce Court. Many people, young and old, are exposed to
these reality shows believing what they see is the "real" criminal justice system at ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
The proponents of cameras in the courtroom also believe that televised trials would educate the
public on courtroom procedure and rules of the court. The media believes that as the viewers watch
real trials on television, they would become more aware of the rules of the court and they would
become more aware of the basic procedures courts have to follow. An example of how cameras in
the courtroom would educate the public would be the all famous O.J. Simpson trial. The O.J.
Simpson trial educated the public on rules of evidence with the "bloody glove" display, the cross–
examination of key witnesses with the examination of Mark Furman, and what role the judge plays
in the process. The media believes that if cameras where not allowed inside O.J. Simpson trial, then
the public for the most part would still not understand the true workings of the court system.
Kimberlianne Podlas note that televised trials will educate the public by giving them a reference for
what the court system is, "its fairness, and who the arbiters of justice are" (Podlas, 2001). Podlas
also explains that the O.J. Simpson trial lead more people to watch and gain a understanding and
respect for the judicial system as well as gaining knowledge of the legal concepts and burdens of the
system (Podlas, 2001).
Just like the arguments made for cameras in the courtroom and the jury deliberation room by the
media, the courtroom working group which

I attended the District Court at 201 West Picacho Ave on March 7, 2011. I sat in on judge Mike
Murphy's court. Judge Murphy started court promptly at 9:00 a.m. but before I got into the court I
had to wait in a long line of about 30 people. then when I finally got to the court house door I had to
go through a metal detector where I had to take off my belt and shoes and everything metal on my
persons. Then I asked one of the officers working the metal dictator how I could ask to sit in on a
criminal court that was going on this morning. She then directed me to court room four. I asked the
bailiff if it was ok for me to sit in on court today for my criminal justice class, and if the case where
criminal matters. The bailiff then told me that ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
the judge then wrote something on it and handed it to the secretary and as he did I heard him say
warrant so I am thinking that Chris Thomas now has a warrant out for his arrest. the next case was
an assault case the defendant in this case was called up by the bailiff and the charges was read and
then he was asked how he pleaded and he stated not guilty. the bailiff then handed him some paper
work that he had got from the judge and then he was told to see the court secretary to get his second
court date.
My reactions to the courtroom observation is that the court house generates allot of money in fines
and get the community allot of committee service. They are a lot more player in the courthouse then
the book states. The bailiff and other officers that work in the court house are major players in the
functions of the court house as well. The secretary is also very important she or he schedules
continuing court dates and handles most of the paper work.
The next court I attended is Magistrate Court is located at 110 Calle de Alegra and I sat in on judge
Joseph Guillory courtroom proceedings. When I went to Magistrate Court it was the same thing as
district court. I arrived early and waited outside with a line of about 20 people. I then had to go
through another metal detector where I had to take off my belt and shoes and everything metal on
my persons. I then made my way down the hall way to judge Joseph

Courtroom Reflection Paper
On July 31, 2017, I remember leaving early from band camp to observe the courtroom in order to
write this paper. I pulled up the address of the courtroom on google maps, and I followed the
direction to evacuate myself out of the school parking lot. I had made two wrong turns due to my
horrible sense of directions, but I was still able to get to my final destination on time. The parking
lot was packed at the Greene County Courthouse, therefore I had to park across the street which was
still pretty packed. Being my first time at the Courthouse, I was completely clueless that there would
be two officers performing security checks. Now writing this paper, I felt so ignorant not knowing
that there would be some type of security involved when entering the county courthouse. The officer
holds on to my keys and my purse was slowly being transported through the scanner. I, on the other
hand, had to walk through a metal door scan. After I was released, I saw a big TV with judges
names, times of the day, division numbers, and the names of cases. I went to Division 26, which is
Judge Carrier's room, and I was planning on watching the trial that was supposed to begin at 3
O'clock. On my way there I was quite interested at the structure of the building. The elevator could
transport to all three floors, but the stairs only connect the first and the second floor. In order to get
from the second floor to the third floor, it is impossible unless you take the elevator. It could be that
the

The Interior Of A Formal Courtroom
The interior of a formal courtroom glistens in a sepia hue. The bench overlooks the room, with
herringbone flags representing their country. A bar harshly splits the room while oak tables rot as
they pay homage to the solemn victors. Dueling jury boxes frame the edges of the room– their
panels demarcated by sharp bezels and accompanied by stern lecterns varnished an undistinguished
gray.
Mirroring benches lay vacant, with the exception of two overwrought neighbors and one anguished
woman holding her 6–month–old child. A corona of incandescence emphasises the indents
separating each weathered stave along the wall. Walking sounds can be heard through the left wall
of the courtroom.
[Two men enter through the leftmost door, Mark Wallace, J.D. and Stanley Kowalski. They are
about thirty years old, sharply dressed in black formalwear. Mr. Wallace carries an ebony suitcase
overflowing with folders and documents. Stanley, guided by the hand of Mr. Wallace, stands
shoulder to shoulder with his defence attorney. Seconds later the other side of the room mirrors the
men's actions; Blanche, a fragile woman in her thirties, enters the room accompanied by her
prosecutor, Ella Stone. Mrs. Stone withers with age as she struggles to cling on to the many folders
in–hand. Judge Ruth Anthony sits herself center bench, accompanied by Bailiff Scott. She scans the
room from Stanley to Blanche, briefly stopping to inspect her carefully crafted mahogany gavel.]
SCOTT:
All rise.
[He waits

Morality And Religion In The Stranger By Albert Camus
In The Stranger, author Albert Camus challenges societal beliefs related to morality and religion.
The main character, Meursault, does not experience emotion as the majority of society does. He is
seemingly unbothered by his mother's death, which many around him find disturbing. Meursault is
entertained by the simple things in life, and does not appear emotionally attached to much of
anything. His apathetic behavior is ultimately his downfall.
The story begins with "Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don't know" (3). The lines
introduce Meursault's key personality trait, his indifference. He simply states the facts and has little
emotional expression when talking about his mother's passing. At his mother's funeral, he felt others
expected him to talk and show emotion and it made him uncomfortable.
When he returns home to Algiers, Meursault carries on with life as normal. Over dinner one
evening, his neighbor Raymond tells of his desire to punish his mistress for infidelity, and asks
Meursault to write a letter to the mistress for him. Meursault agrees, saying "I tried my best to
please Raymond because I didn't have any reason not to please him" (32). While Raymond is a man
of questionable morals, he acts with purpose. Meursault, on the other hand, acts with mostly passive
indifference, doing things simply because he doesn't have a reason not to do them.
The next afternoon, Raymond calls Meursault at work and tells him about a group of Arabs
following him, and that

For my second observation it was a criminal case. When I got to the courtroom the case has already
started. This case was about a guy who had already been sentencing to jail and he came back so the
judge could reviewed his sentencing. The defendant was on his late 20s and he had previous
criminal history. The defense attorney wrote a motion for the judge to review his client's sentencing
because he believed the first judge did not use his discretion wisely. So, therefore he believed that
his client should have be sentencing differently. When I got to the courtroom, the judge was
reviewing all the defendant's charges and he was asking the defense attorney questions as well. At
the end, the judge decided that the defendant 's sentencing would

Courtroom Analysis
When someone steps into the courtroom it requires that person to change how they act, to change
how they present themselves, and to change who they are. When I stepped into the courtroom at the
National Judicial Competition my whole world changed. However, it didn't happen all at once. The
process began months before I arrived in Chicago. It started the day I accepted the invitation from
the state office. That day the little boy inside of me began to fade. A boy stepped off the bus and
methodically picked a path around puddles on his way home. He bounded up the front steps,
grabbed a handful of letters, and pushed open the door. It wasn't until he tossed the letters onto the
counter that he saw the powder blue envelope with his name on it. He tore open the sealed flap and
pulled out a simple, understated letter. He read it once, then again to make sure it was really
addressed to him. Immediately the excitement and the anxiety of being accepted swirled in his head.
He knew this would eclipse anything he had done before. Standing there next to the counter he
decided he would go. Without knowing it, making that decision slowly began to shape him from the
inside. It started invisible transformation that ended up defining who he is. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
From the minute I sat down at the conference table I knew I was in a different league. For the first
time in my life I had to make a conscious effort to keep up in conversation. The first thing we talked
about was our goals. Up until that point It had been rare in my life to share my goals with others. As
the ten members went around the table and spoke about what they wanted, a single thread linked us
all together. The next three months were filled with intense preparation and the thread that we all
shared grew stronger. The thread was a drive to

Observation Of A Courtroom
Courtroom Workgroup
The courtroom workgroup consists of a Judge, Prosecutor, Defense attorney, Bailiff, Clerks, Court
reporters and the public. There can be three types of clerks present at court the law clerk, clerk of
court, and the docket clerk. During my court observation I observed the judge, prosecutor, and the
defense attorney. The Prosecutor and Judge were observed more during my court observation. The
Defense attorney wasn't observed as much because the defendants waived the right to an attorney on
some cases.
The judge, prosecutors, and defense attorneys all have detailed qualifications. The most noted
qualification is the actors must have completed law school. They must be educated in Legal ethnics
to even take the bar to get out of law school. After completing law school, the actors can become
attorneys or prosecutors. To become a state judge, one must be appointed to that position by the
merit system. And to become a federal judge an individual must be nominated. Also, an actor who is
a practicing attorney whether it be defense or persecution to move up in rank the individual must be
promoted. But to be a chief prosecutor one must have to be elected locally. All federal attorneys
roles are given by appointment.
Roles & Duties Prosecutors have the duty of prosecuting criminal cases. A prosecutor holds the
most critical role in the criminal courts system because of its central position. Prosecutor role
bridges all other roles. The reason why is because the

Cameras in the Courtroom Essay
This fall, Zacarias Moussaoui is scheduled to go to trial for his participation in the airplane bombing
of the World Trade Center in New York City. Along with the media frenzy that accompanies a trial
of this magnitude, a separate battle is being waged between Courtroom Television Network LLC
(Court–TV) and the U.S. Government over the right of the former to televise trial proceedings.
The Government of the United States' opposition is stated in a legal brief dated January 4, 2002.
Their stance is that "the televising of federal criminal trials is prohibited by both Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 53 ('The taking of photographs in the courtroom during the progress of judicial
proceedings or radio ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
532 (1965), many potential pitfalls of televised proceedings are listed, including: "(1) the possibility
that televising the proceedings will have a 'direct bearing on (a juror's) vote as to guilt or innocence',
(2) the possibility that jurors will be 'preoccupied with the telecasting rather than with the
testimony', (3) the possibility that jurors will be influenced by television broadcasts of the
proceedings or subjected to commentary or criticism from members of the public, (4) the difficulty
of obtaining an unbiased venire if a retrial is required in a case where the first trial was televised...."
Court–TV's brief requests allowance for cameras in the courtroom. It opens with the statement that
all while fifty states permit some type of television coverage, and thirty–seven states allow cameras
in criminal proceedings, the federal courts do not allow cameras in the courtroom. The defendant
claims that this ban is unconstitutional. They go on to argue that "there is no principled
constitutional distinction between the right to observe legal proceedings first–hand and the right to
record and telecast those

Courtroom Workgroup Paper
Courtroom Workgroup Paper
Fertina Bryant
CJA/204
Feburary 23, 2013
Christopher Berry
Courtroom Workgroup Paper * The author will determine courtroom groups, how the groups
interact daily, and recommend changes to the groups. The author will also describe prosecutor roles
and the cases he pursues. Finally, the author will elaborate on the funnel of criminal justice with the
backlog among the courtroom group, the court system, give an example, and explain how to
eliminate backlog cases. * Working the Courtroom System * Courtroom workgroups consist of a
judge, a prosecutor, and a defense. These courtroom groups remain Senior Officers in court who
determines the appropriateness of conduct. These officers settle questions of ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
The judges swear before appointment that as Judge he promises to remain tough on Crime, enforce
the death penalty, and if elected, He proves a political moderate. First used in Missouri in 1940, the
governor appoints judges from a list compiled by a non–partisan nominating commission. Judges
serve on the bench for a year (Schmalleger, 2011). They remain voted to the bench after a year of
service. If the vote is yes, the judge sits for the full term. * Although the police, judges, defense
attorneys, and probation officers remain involved in specific duties, the prosecutor proves
challenged in phases of the court process. Prosecutors challenge judicial decisions at times (Byrd,
2001). The office of the prosecutor proves part of the executive branch of the government. In all
phases of the court process, given broad discretion, his/her job is to advocate the guilt of defendant
vigorously. The prosecutors represent the people. Prosecutor screen the case. They determine if a
crime has been committed. They research the crime to examine if a suspect has proved properly
identified and if the evidence is sufficient to support a guilty verdict (Schmalleger, 2011). * Nolle
Prosequi (nol. Pros.) should never present based on local jury success or public opinion decision to
plea bargain, plea negotiations, and ureviewable discretions. They prove recommended toward
offenders amounts of bail; comply to rules of discovery, and assisting with district

Acrylic Courtroom Coating
All courts aren't constructed very much the same. The top of tennis court could be hard or soft
predicated on your preferences. But today people prefer to perform on smooth surfaced tennis court,
the Acrylic/Cushion Tennis Courtroom. Going by the existing demand the most favorable may be
the standard 3 coating color system tennis courtroom. Once a coating of resilient coating is used on
the hard coating it outcomes in the cushion courtroom. Among the acrylic resurfacing item and the
courtroom paint the cushioning can be used. The cushion tennis courtroom are can be an all weather
surface area. The multi–layer cushion program offers maximum player convenience and exceptional
toughness for a long time, sometimes through the entire life

Courtroom Standards Analysis
Courtroom Standards Analysis Chris CJA/484 June 17, 2013 Courtroom Standards Analysis
Courtroom Personnel There are a number of individuals who make up the courtroom personnel.
Each individual whether it be the judge, bailiff, court reporter, courtroom clerk, prosecutor, defense
counsel, jury, defendant, or witness contribute to the shaping of legal law. The judge who presides
over the trial has the ultimate authority in the courtroom. "The judge must see that the trail is
conducted in an orderly manner according to prescribed rules and laws covering the selection of the
jury, the presentation of evidence, the arguments of the lawyers, the instructions to the jury, and the
rending of the verdict" (Arizona Judicial Branch, 2013, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
All work group members influence and are influenced by the other members, and members have
different bases of power and areas of knowledge. Judges have formal authority and may direct
actions of the court and the attorneys. Prosecutors have superior case knowledge and have discretion
about what matters will go to trial. Defense attorneys are able to interview witnesses, obtain
evidence through discovery, and file pretrial motions. The four common goals of the members are
doing justice; maintaining group cohesion; disposing of the case load; and reducing uncertainty.
Their different bases of knowledge give group members various types of power and influence.
Three interaction techniques that are frequently utilized are unilateral decisions, adversarial
proceedings, and negotiations. (G. Larry Mays (n.d), para. 3) References Arizona Judicial Branch.
(2013). Jury Service Courtroom Personnel. Retrieved from
http://www.azcourts.gov/juryduty/courtroompersonnel.aspx National Institute of Justice. (2008).
Courtroom Personnel. Retrieved from http://www.njj.gov/training/firearms–
training/module14/fir_m14_t08_02.htm G. Larry Mays,. (n.d). American courts and the judicial
process . Retrieved from

Courtroom Observation Essay
On October 31st, I went to the Richard J. Daley Courthouse to listen to a court hearing. This was my
first time being inside a court room and finding my way around was a bit of a struggle. I made my
way to the 17th floor where I was given different room numbers to observe different hearings. My
only experiences in observing courtroom proceedings were from a majority of the typical daytime
television shows. Clearly, I came in with some expectations on the structure of the proceedings were
going to be held. To my surprise, I found out that it was not anything like the television shows. It
was a little bit more chaotic then I expected. Both parties were still in the process of making sure
everything was set up and asked for more time. The hearings were supposed to start at 9:30, but
ended up starting around 10 o'clock. The jury was told that there was a "technical delay." The judge
of the case was Judge Marguerite A. Quinn. This was the third day of the hearings, so I had no
background information on what was going on. While sitting in one of the benches in the back of
the courtroom in room 1610, I asked a gentleman sitting behind me to inform me on what the case
was about. He explained to me the two parties involved and what happened. The plaintiff of the
case, Mr. Montagano, who was not present during the hearing, was injured when a bundle of steel
pipes fell on him when he was assisting in taking the bundles of steel pipes off the truck. The
injuries were so critical that both his legs had to be amputated. His attorney was Mr. Joe Power. Joe
Power was a graduate of Loyola Law School and is a big donor to Loyola University. Mr.
Montagano was suing the crane company for what I believe was a negligent tort. Mr. John Patten
was the defense attorney for the crane company. The hearings started with the final witness being
called to the stand. Mr. Steven Robert Ardnt is a human factors scientist. Human factor scientists
study how humans behave physically and psychologically in relation to their environment, which in
this case would be machinery. Mr. John Patton began asking question to Mr. Ardnt about his
educational background. This was done to establish his credibility in what he does,

Courtroom 302
A very significant case in Cook County Courts was the Bridgeport case, known as a "heater" case
because of the publicity that surround it, and the racial overtones (Bogira 181). The Bridgeport case
involved three white teenagers, Michael Kwidzinski, Jasas, and Caruso that were accused of brutally
beating two young black boys who were riding their bikes in the predominantly white
neighborhood. The entire summary of the case, in Courtroom 302, was based around the fact that
one of the boys, Michael Kwidzinski, was most likely innocent. The question then turns to the boy
himself, Michael Kwidzinski; if he was innocent, why did hid then accept a guilty plea bargain?
Kwidzinski was dealing with the case for a year and a half before even getting ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Jenson, Caruso's lawyer, wanted to call two girls from the party to testify against Guadagno. Judge
Locallo said the state would then be allowed to call Deena, Caruso's ex girlfriend, to testify. Deena's
statement would then not only implicate Guadagno in the case but it would also place Caruso,
Jenson's client, at the scene of the crime (Bogira 329). If Guadagno would have been forced to
testify he would have been viewed as the third criminal and could have cleared Kwidzinski of any
charges.
A significant reason the courts continued with prosecuting Kwidzinski was that reversing the
charges would make people question the legitimacy of the case all together. The state's attorney's
office had already charged three alleged attackers. If there was any doubt of Kwidzinski being
involved in the case there would be a problem with the lawyers of the other two attackers by trying
to jump on the bandwagon to freedom. Even though Kwidzinski may have been justifiably innocent
and wrongly accused, the attorneys for Jasas and Caruso would have claimed their clients were
wrongly accused as well.
Another major reason for keeping the prosecution for Kwidzinski going is when prosecuting
attorney O'Reilly presented to the grand jury a request for an indictment on Caruso, Jasas &
Kwidzinski, he presented one

Televised Courtrooms In Canada
Televised Courtrooms
Against
If we let the courtrooms be televised to the public, they will start to lose faith in the court system if
they do not like what they see. Citizens who watch the programs are most likely going to have a bias
and will desire a final judgement that will go one way more than the other. A judge's or jury's verdict
might cause mass hysteria which can have negative effects to a jury member's personal life and the
reputation of the justice done in Canada. The country will ridicule the judge even though they do not
understand the law fully themselves and criticize the jury for unanimously voting for someone to be
guilty or not guilty when the viewers want a differing response. The jury do not know everything
going on outside of the court and what the media is saying therefore the nation might have an
opposing opinion to them. Their faces will be plastered on television for anyone to see and for
anyone to judge them. This will stress out an already uncomfortable jury. Alternatively, another
result could be the jury being swayed by the public to select a certain decision instead of their own.
As a ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Criminal cases being more publicised will cause the viewers to be distressed about the number of
murders and robberies occurring in Canada. The media will catch fire over these felonies causing
many people to talk and spread the news making it seem like there is an epidemic of crimes even
though the police–reported crime rate in Canada has been decreasing for over 2 decades. However,
since the news stations and media will be broadcasting to the public about all these scandals and
modify some of the facts to make it more "entertaining", many people will believe it and think there
are many criminal acts committed in Canada than there really are. The point here is that what the
media chooses to focus on often times becomes the facts regardless of what the actual facts

Courtroom Interaction Essay
Courtroom interaction consists of interpretive aspects opened to the audience and jury. However,
courtroom accounts of events can be judged by common–sense knowledge. In addition, cross–
examinations rely on assessing the truth and invalidating the other accounts. It is problematic for
jurors due to common sense bases allowing desired influences to effect the verdict. When one is
interrogated during courtroom interaction, the turns are either designed to imply blame or justify an
action. For instance, a transcript of a 1979 case begins with a pre–allocation in the form of a yes–no
question. However, once the witness failed to comply with the turns, the council repeated the
question and enforced the yes–no order. To illustrate, a member ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
The first pair is 'adjacency pairs', which anticipate the answers to be said by their second–pair parts.
Together, these two–pair parts are complementary through conditional relevance (Goodwin &
Duranti, 622). If the second pair part response were to not be given, it is then interpreted to be not
present. This can be simplified to expectations of explicit requests. If a request is made, the premade
response is a "yes". When the response is unfavorable, the turn is then modified to restate the
preferred answer. In addition, when interrogating a witness, the courtroom uses agreement to format
a basis of reasoning for the accusation. (624). For instance, the witness's response to the amount of
petrol bombs thrown was "only a couple". This response lessons the severity of the incident.
Following the response of how many bombs were dropped, the witness continues to add on to the
response; which contained too much information being said. Because too much information was
given for a simple question, it displays how the witness felt potentially attacked through that
questioning (624). Thus, courtroom questionings are favored to their own benefit, as well as the use
of using agreement to form potential guilt. To conclude, courtroom interaction through context in
courtroom talk can differ. Interpretation of the audience can be swayed by common sense
knowledge, structure of turn–by–turn organization of talk, and general

My Reflection On The Court Trip
This is a report of my reflection on the court trip that my class, CLU 3M attened on May 18, 2016.
This report contains my reflection on what I did that day, what I saw, and my opinion on our judicial
system. In this report some of the terms that I recognized during the trips are bolded, and I have
elaborated on the meanings of the terms. I will conclude this report with my opinion the court
process. Brad and I walked into the provincial court on Wyndham street at approximately 8:40 am.
Provincial courts are the lower courts in the jurisdiction. As soon as I noticed 4 clipboards that had
pages with a list of names and timing on them, this was also referred as a docket.The names were
the offenders of the case, and there time represented their trial time. An offender is the person who
had committed the illegal act. As I walked down the narrow hall I joined in with the rest of the class.
We were sitting in the waiting area, and near the sign that said duty counsel. Duty counsels are
lawyers that can give the accused advise on what they should when the accused do not have a
lawyer. As we waited a lawyer came outside of the office and yelled, "If anybody needs duty
counsel". I noticed there were two court rooms, both had their own dockets. The court room was
separated by the waiting area, and the vending machine. As I waited for Mr. Fast to come, I looked
around and saw some really sketchy looking people, I even recognized two from my elementary
school. There were allot of

Courtroom Prosecuting
Original Title " A Job worth doing, is worth doing well." Standing in my office helping businesses
with their contracts with one another or being able to stand in a courtroom prosecuting and saving a
victim from having their offender being let off easy brings me joy. Seeing that i have grown as an
strong and confident person who defends companies and the helpless victims who are not heard. To
get to this point it took a lot of work such as passing exams, gaining an four year degree from a
university, getting acceptance into law school, and also all the practicing needed.
Unquestionably educational requirements to be accepted into law school require being in rigorous
classes and passing tests to get accepted into law school. "Must receive a ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
" Median annual wage for lawyers as of May 2016 sways around $118,160"(Occupational Outlook
Handbook). Salaries vary on the experience of the lawyer along with the size and location of the
employer. Those who own their very own law firm are said to earn less money than those who work
for a partnership law firm. "Employment of lawyers is projected to grow six percent from 2014 to
2024, about as fast as the average for all occupations"(Occupational Outlook Handbook).
Percentage rates of jobs growing for attorneys are at an high rate. Due to the demand for legal works
lawyers are expected to continue growing for individuals, businesses, and any other levels of legal
services needed.All these obstacles throughout an attorney's life requires hard work but is worth it in
the end due to the fact you know you did everything right.
As stated in the beginning "A job worth doing, is worth doing well" is explained throughout my
paper of how an lawyer responds to this truism. From law school to the real life is all about giving
your all in the job knowing your job is worth giving all the might in your body. Therefore becoming
a lawyer wasn't easy but with enough dedication it could be doneWorks

Courtroom 302
The book Courtroom 302, written by Steve Bogira in 2005, is about the criminal courts in Chicago,
IL. Steve Bogira graduated from Northwestern University, and is an excellent reporter for the
Chicago Review. Courtroom 302 is story told mainly from through Steve Bogira's observations.
Bogira observes a courtroom (Courtroom 302), and basically the entire justice system process from
beginning to end. The courtroom that Bogira observes is in the control of Judge Daniel Locallo.
Judge Locallo helps give Bogira an all access view, plus vital personal thoughts and feelings about
issues and events that he has dealt with; and Bogira has observed. Judge Locallo is not the only
person that expresses personal information. Many employees of the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Then Locallo has to deal with the politics involved. Caruso Sr. is an apparent mobster, and he raises
hell in the courtroom because he believes that the eighteen–year term that his son received is too
harsh considering that the other two men involved will probably get probation. Caruso tries to make
a point that the media and politics forced Locallo into a corner, but Locallo reminds him that his son
"planned the attack, led the attack, and ...finished the attack," (Bogira p. 315). The prejudice issue
was risen when the Supreme Court insured that the jury would be color–blind, but due to the many
issues that surround the reasons for few black jurors (voir dire), only two black women made the
jury and no black males. Last the issue of compassion, which allows first–time offenders to receive
a lesser sentence. Locallo sentenced Caruso's co–defendants to probation because the evidence
against them wasn't really there compared to Caruso Jr. himself. As far as Caruso's sentencing,
Judge Locallo decided to give him eight years, because with the other two men only getting
probation he didn't want to look inconsistent by giving Caruso a very stiff sentence. There are two
important themes that are illustrated by Bogira throughout Courtroom

The Courtroom Of The Courthouse
The courthouse I visited was not one of the largest courthouses but still a good choice for me at
least. South Regional Courthouse which is located on 3550 Hollywood Blvd, Hollywood, FL 33021.
Upon Entering the courthouse, I had no idea where to find criminal courts so I went up to the front
desk and asked where to go. After explaining I'm a student and I don't have to be in court today they
then advised to to go to two rooms. Courtroom 210 and 230 so I decided to walk directly into 210.
Upon entering I noticed the estranged aroma of a courtroom and the many people sitting down
waiting to be preceded upon. They were 2 officers in the front which didn't look too happy but
seems like they were used to this by now. I had no idea what criminal charges I was about to
encounter but I found a seat in the back and started to listen.
Judge Claudia Robinson was preceding and she was not the judge you would kind of expect to see.
Mid 40's but in good shape. A lot like Judge Judy but younger. She has a way of doing things as I
continued to listen I came to find out. Many people there were there for leaving the scene of an
accident, marijuana possession, disorderly conduct. They all were facing jail time but the judge was
really nice and pretty much offered every single person there a deal. Some people were there
because they missed court and had to come back but the judge could not rule out a conviction or a
deal because apparently when you miss court you have to pay a fine. She gave

Going into this particular assignment I wasn't really sure what to expect or even where I needed to
go to see an interesting case mainly because I had never been to the County building before or
observed a courtroom proceeding before. However, I went this past Thursday to try to watch and see
what I could learn. When I arrived to the county building I wasn't sure where the courtrooms were
so I was kind of wandering around. After a few minutes a man approached me and asked what I was
there for and I told him to observe a courtroom for a class so he directed me to the info office for
further help. After explaining to them why I was there an officer told me Courtroom 4 which is the
Major Felony court had some interesting cases so I should go there. Throughout the duration of this
paper I will explain in detail the five different cases that I observed while I was there. The first case
I observed I missed a little bit of the beginning due to wandering around the building lost for a
while. Due to this I missed the name the defense attorney as well as the name of the prosecutor. This
particular case was The State of Indiana v. Kim Cooney Thomas and her charges were battery with a
deadly weapon, criminal recklessness, as well as leaving the scene of an accident. The second case
that I observed was State of Indiana v. Nikki Hart. The defendant was in court due to a probation
violation from a prior arrest. This case moved pretty fast and the judge set her trial date for
December 1,

Courtroom Case Analysis
Today (February 4th, 2016), I was placed in Courtroom 4C of the courthouse and instructed to sit–in
and observe every case brought forward to the judge today. I have to say, some of the cases I heard
about today were not your real average day cases. One thing one of my supervisors; Vinny, told me
to look out for was the the college/high school students who got in trouble for underage possession
because they stick–out like a sore thumb in the courthouse. He said you can tell which ones they are
based on the way they are dressed and how nervous they look when they are sitting and waiting for
their case to be heard. Vin was not wrong, once the room was open for people to come in, I saw a
group of 5–6 college–age students walk in very well dressed and most of them came in with one or
two parents next to them. Throughout the day, some of the cases brought forward to the judge ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In one case, a middle–aged woman was charged with domestic assault against her boyfriend, but the
story behind it was absurd. The woman was angry at her boyfriend for something he did, so she took
a pizza he threw in the trash, shoved it down his throat along with her sharp finger nails, and cut the
inside of the mans throat. She then proceeded to start beating the man and throwing the pizza at him
until the cops were called on them and she was arrested by the Pawtucket police department. In
another case, my favorite case of the entire day, a elderly woman (roughly 60–65 years old) was
charged with the use and possession fraud checks and identification and the possession of an
unregistered fire–arm. Along with these crazy charges she was facing, this woman showed up to the
courthouse wearing a t–shirt that said on it, "Mr. Bin Laden, your party is waiting for you at the
gate." Why was she wearing this shirt? and Why was she arrested for these crazy charges? I wish I
knew the answers to these questions, but I will be looking into her case a little more when I go back
to the office

Courtroom

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)

Courtroom