They start off by saying that one is innocent until proven guilty. This may not be true in a lot of cases but that is apart of the concept believe it or not. But let's say, for example, that the defendant in a murder trial has hundreds of tattoos. The jurors image of this person is immediately tainted from the second he/she walks in the court room. Therefore, this person, in at least one of the jurors mind, is not 100% completely innocent and they haven't even heard a word about the case yet. I'm not saying this is every case or even most cases. Just that it's VERY possible and I'm SURE it has happened before. So maybe the jurors should be blindfolded? Sometimes cases do have blind juries. First impressions matter A LOT. I'm sure you've heard about lawyers advising their clients to dress a certain way and/or wear their hair up etc. It's just hard for one person, let alone 12, to block out preconceived notions that they've developed about society throughout their lifetime. And this is either used to a defendants advantage or used against he/she.
Next, the person is allowed to get a lawyer. This part is somewhat unfair from the get go because the more money you have, the better lawyer you will get. Your lawyer has the opportunity to basically make you look like an angel to the jury. Then there's the jury selection. This is as fair as it can be in my mind. I like that it's a random group of strangers to prevent a group of like minded individuals. The defendants lawyer gets to question a pool of jurors to figure out their mentality to see if they're a good fit to potentially find their client not guilty. Next is the lawyer(s) finding witnesses, which include character witnesses, to anyone that was present etc. and figuring out the right questions to ask them while they're under oath and to also prepare whoever they put on the stand for the potential questions the prosecutor will ask during cross examination. All of this is to basically make the jury think of reasonable doubt or that the defendant is innocent. But why the number 12? 12 random strangers. I'd NEVER want 12 random people deciding my fate. But I guess that's what your lawyer is there for. To convince them BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that you're innocent. And I also like the phrase "Beyond a reasonable doubt". But, even that phrase isn't used in every case like it should be. Evidence is very important. May it be, video of the crime, DNA of any sort, weapons of any sort etc. Sad to say but, evidence can be planted or lost or switched which is apart of the corruption aspect.
Now, the first actual thing the lawyer does in the court room is have an opening statement professing his/her clients innocence or the specific reason why his/her client commit the crime. And the lawyer better be good and knowledgeable about when to object. The lawyer in Treyvon Martin's case wasn't allowed in the courtroom during the entire trial, so his second in command was in charge and fail to call a lot of objections resulting in George Zimmerman being proven not guilty. The last thing about the lawyers job is his/her closing statement which is super important because it's the last thing that the jury will get to hear about the case at all before they deliberate.
During the entire trial, everything matters. The defendants composure matters so much. How they walk in and out, what they wear, what they're looking towards etc. Their behavior in the courtroom is basically on trial too. The defendants lawyers relationship with the judge matters somewhat as well. That's not talked about much but the judge may know things about the lawyer for example, what type of defendants to take on and represent. So that matters. I'm just gonna throw this out there but how the defendants family and other support in the court room behave and look maybe matter as well.
Now, the first actual thing the lawyer does in the court room is have an opening statement professing his/her clients innocence or the specific reason why his/her client commit the crime. And the lawyer better be good and knowledgeable about when to object. The lawyer in Treyvon Martin's case wasn't allowed in the courtroom during the entire trial, so his second in command was in charge and fail to call a lot of objections resulting in George Zimmerman being proven not guilty. The last thing about the lawyers job is his/her closing statement which is super important because it's the last thing that the jury will get to hear about the case at all before they deliberate.
During the entire trial, everything matters. The defendants composure matters so much. How they walk in and out, what they wear, what they're looking towards etc. Their behavior in the courtroom is basically on trial too. The defendants lawyers relationship with the judge matters somewhat as well. That's not talked about much but the judge may know things about the lawyer for example, what type of defendants to take on and represent. So that matters. I'm just gonna throw this out there but how the defendants family and other support in the court room behave and look maybe matter as well.
Last but most definitely not least, there is the judge. Now, if the judge is corrupt, it's over before it even begins. To me, the judge is the most crucial part of the justice system. Judges are supposed to use their discretion in every case. But, judges sometimes get paid to send as many people to jail as they can because that means money and free labor in the prisons. Believe it or not, the justice system is a huge cash cow. Everything is quadruple price in the jails. A dollar bag of popcorn is $4 in jail. Our country makes so much money off of jails and prisons in this country it's ridiculous. Some say prisoners live better than some people outside of jail and definitely better than homeless individuals. The subject of jails is a whole other blog topic (haha) but some judges decision is swayed one way or another because of the money aspect of it.
All in all, is fair and unfair. I believe it's more unfair than fair because of the corruption, individuals being judged off of more than the evidence and what type of lawyer a person can afford.
Welp, those are my thoughts! I'd love to hear yours whether you agree or disagree!
COMMENT, LIKE, SHARE!
All in all, is fair and unfair. I believe it's more unfair than fair because of the corruption, individuals being judged off of more than the evidence and what type of lawyer a person can afford.
Welp, those are my thoughts! I'd love to hear yours whether you agree or disagree!
COMMENT, LIKE, SHARE!