Courtroom Standards Analysis
Name
Institution
Introduction
The society is expected to be at peace and equality should be the cornerstone of each act portrayed by the members of these communities. Law and order is an essential aspect in the society as it provides a conducive ground for economic, social, and political advancement. However, injustice never ceases to happen due to different reasons, both social, economic, or political, and that is where the ethics and legal law strikes to ensure that members of the society acquire the same rights. A courtroom is the set up that most countries have put in place to provide individuals with justice based on the laws that govern the state. The following paper seeks to discuss and evaluate the different roles of some influential persons in a courtroom, such as the judge, prosecutor, defense counsel, witnesses, and bailiffs, as well as the benefits and pitfalls of independent and mutual interdependence between them. And an assessment on some of the legal and ethical standards that guide their operations and their impact on both procedural and substantive laws.
Courtroom Personnel
In the United States’ courtroom, considering that most countries have a distinct structure, the judge sits behind the bench (his raised desk), which is often surrounded by the state and federal flags together with the great seal. Many jurisdictions require that a judge should wear a plain black robe, and they are tasked with several duties apart from total control of the entire room (Bennett, & Feldman, 2014). The judge is also responsible for hearing the evidence that is provided, pronouncing decisions on different motions, instructing the juries as well as making rulings on various cases. In every case, a judge has to assure that law is being employed and utilized effectively. Consequently, the prosecutor is another essential player in the room who has three significant roles, and those are appearing in court, investigating crimes, and deciding if or not to instigate legal proceedings. The police are also found in a courtroom, and they play an essential role in aiding the prosecutor in investigating the crime. For comprehensive coverage of evidence, the prosecutor comes in contact with the suspect, the victim, and the witnesses of the crime. After gathering enough evidence, he or she decides whether the crime is minor or brings it to a courtroom (Griffin, & Caplow, 2010). When a lawsuit is launched, a hearing must take place before a civil court. The prosecutor’s job is to show the defendant has perpetrated the offense. To prove if the defendant is responsible, he or she challenges the defendant, the witnesses, and the experts.
Also known as court officers or marshals, the bailiffs are also critical personnel in local, federal, or even state courts because they play a role in every judicial step right from traffic to high court cases. Their significant duties in the courtroom include providing security to the judge and other members present in the court, announcing the entrance of the judge, collecting evidence from juries and legal parties as well as accompanying the sequestered juries. The task of defense counsel is to represent the accused and seek to free the individual from the charges in the trial. But deciding whether the client is guilty or not isn’t his or her job (Eltringham, 2010). That must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecutor. Attorneys always defend the accused and the complainant at court. As trial officials, lawyers are anticipated to be conversant and comply with specific legal laws. The job of an attorney is to represent their client’s rights. Attorneys provide facts and evidence to aid judge and jury with reaching a reasonable judgment. During court trials, the witnesses serve a somewhat critical function. By explaining to the judge or jury what they understand about the case, they assist in clarifying what occurred. A witness is anyone possessing specific knowledge about a criminal offense. Witnesses are expected to give an oath or swear to tell the court only the truth and facts about the crime.
Benefits and pitfalls of the interrelationships in a courtroom
Regardless of whether an individual is guilty of a particular crime or not, one has the right to a fair trial because this will serve as justice to both parties. And arriving at a fair trial means giving both parties an equal opportunity to express themselves (Bennett & Feldman, 2014). To make a ruling, the judge depends on the evidence presented by both parties with the help of the prosecutor, who provides proof that acts as the basis of the case. Judges and prosecutors do not denounce actions of violence only intensively. Judicial authorities do have a proactive duty to prosecute any accusation or allegation of injustice, hold those involved to account, and give their victims restitution and security. The victim is sure to get justice served when there is adequate and transparent interdependence between all these court personnel and those who will get convicted for crimes they are not involved in, drops significantly. However, the entire process might get complicated, take longer than anticipated, or even result in further law-breaking if any of the personnel goes against the law, such as bribe-taking, lying, or favoritism. For instance, if a prosecutor gets bribed regardless of how big the crime is, this will render the info provided with the witnesses either false or contradictory, hence giving the judge a hard time ruling on the offense. Another drawback of independence in a court is the presentation of biased verdicts, do not follow the jurisdiction, and also do not guarantee the victims justice (Eltringham, 2010). For example, even though the evidence provided by the lawyer and the witness are facts of the crime, if the judge has been bribed or blackmailed, the ruling the case is interfered with.
Ethical and legal standards in a courtroom
Judges, like all the other court personnel, are subjected to some ethical and legal rules that impact their operations in the justice system. Judges ought to abide by the codes of conduct for United States judges, which consists of set ethical guidelines and principles. Judges acquire guidance on judicial integrity matters and independence, the avoidance of impropriety or its look, judicial impartiality, and diligence together with permissible extra-judicial operations by utilizing the codes of conduct (Griffin, & Caplow, 2010). When such standards are implemented throughout the judicial system, rulings of most cases will be just, and the victims of the criminals’ acts will be served with justice. For instance, judges may not preside over cases that are impacted by his or her facts about the disputed facts or involved in the case earlier may be as a lawyer. The lawyer must try to defend the innocent and punish the accused, recognize the complainant and victim’s needs, and uphold the civil and civil rights of individuals, both offenders, and complainants. Lack of these standards within the system leads to drastic impacts not only on the plaintiff but also the society as a whole. That is because when the judicial system is rotten, the crime rate increases as many criminals will be set free, and if it was a case like rape, the offenders are confident of repeating the act.
Conclusion
Law and order is an essential aspect in the society as it provides a conducive ground for economic, social, and political development, and the court plays a vital part in ensuring its success. The judges, who are the central focus of the courtrooms, have the duty of making case rulings based on the evidence provided by the prosecutor who tries to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the crime happened (Neubauer, & Fradella, 2018). And as much as an attorney might want the best for his or her client, incorporation of ethical and legal standards in their operation is vital because it promotes justice. Moreover, these standards influence the procedural and substantive laws that exist within the society as the behavior of individuals around the region gets regulated with the competence of the judicial system.
References
Bennett, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (2014). Reconstructing reality in the courtroom: Justice and judgment in American culture. Quid Pro Books.
Eltringham, N. (2010). Judging the “Crime of Crimes.” Transitional justice: Global mechanisms and local realities after genocide and mass violence, 206.
Griffin, L., & Caplow, S. (2010). Changes to the Culture of Adversarialism: Endorsing Candor, Cooperation, and Civility in Relationships Between Prosecutors and Defense Counsel. Hastings Const. LQ, 38, 845.
Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2018). America’s courts and the criminal justice system. Cengage Learning.