Subjects:
§ The prosecution begins by briefly outlining the facts of the case to the courtroom.
§ The prosecution then calls witnesses to the court and produces evidence to support its case. At this point the defence is permitted to cross-examine and challenge the evidence.
§ The defence then presents its own case, following the same procedures, were by the prosecution is able to challenge and cross-examine, defence witnesses and evidence.
§ At the end of both sides cross-examination, both sides will sum up its case, which, is in turn followed by a judges summing up.
§ At this point the jury is sent out to determine a unanimous verdict (although the judge may accept a majority verdict of at least 10 to 2).
§ If the verdict is guilty, the defence makes a plea in mitigation, asking the judge to be lenient in sentencing.
§ Following a non-guilty verdict the defendant can leave the court, acquitted.
However, following the verdict and sentencing an appeal procedure may occur.
If a defendant is found guilty they may wish to appeal to the Court of Appeal (C.A.) or the Divisional Court of
. . .
Some examples of why the defendant may appeal could be on the grounds of:
§ Police or prosecution malpractice occurred in the case. Though, in some cases newspapers may even persuade a witness to come forward on the basis of a financial incentive, which is going to make a prosecution or defendants case unreliable or misleading.
§ The trial judge has misdirected the jury on the case.
A final point that is also suggested by the Auld committee is the unnecessary presence of a jury in a complicated fraud trial. ) if they have sufficient grounds on which to appeal and have approval of either the Crown Court or the appeal court they wish to refer the case to.
As the jury represents a microcosm of society which perspective in the complexity of the courtroom is a requirement to make sure the defendant is given the correct verdict, and also to ensure justice is carried out for the prosecution.
However, in this type of mass media persuasion, it’s not only the jury that may be persuaded, as witnesses may be persuaded to decline their evidence on the grounds of what they have read.
In my opinion there are weaknesses in this system of procedure, however, I feel what may seem weaknesses in one instance, may not perhaps be as significant weakness in other cases and may perhaps be part of the strengths in others.
An example from a defendant’s perspective is that if the mass media manage to persuade public opinion that the defendant is already guilty, the jury chosen may perhaps already have decided upon a verdict before they even enter the court to hear the case.
§ Evidence could be misleading or unreliable.
A remedy for this as suggested by the Auld committee is let the defendant decide whether he wants the jury present at the case.
Essay's Topics
All research is for reference purposes only.