Law describing and evaluating the roles of the courtroom work group Essay

A court room work crowd is a term referring to professionals that serve in the court on a daily basis. These professionals include a prosecutor, the immoral defence attorney and the judicial attainicer. The courtroom workings group seeks to bring justice to all. It ensures that all parties ar accorded due(p) fairness and equal opportunity regardless of gender, race, age, religious tie beam nor any(prenominal) other factor. They alike see to it that trials are completed palmyly. The plan of court room working group is associated with plea bargaining.The courtroom working group has shown tremendous explanatory power in overburdened courts dealing with huge encase loads. Describing and Evaluating Roles of Courtroom Work Group Professionals that serve in the court, each have a commitment to oversee a successful trial completion. Due to this commitment they must(prenominal) each follow a strict code of ethics and also they must adhere to the justness and its practice. In most cases however, the itemise of judges and attorneys is limited hence on that point is a possibility that a personal as well as professional relation that may stem up.However this must non be prioritised by either of the parties involved and the pursuit of justice must always remain the order of the day. The changes I would recommend are wage increase of the bar when it comes to security measures. The reason why I suggest this is because sometimes violent criminal offenders may take advantage of the courtroom purlieu and cause havoc inside the court. For example in the past at that place was a reported case whereby an offender grabbed an officers side arm and started shooting randomly in the courtroom.Safety measures should be put in place in order to curb such bizarre scenarios in the future. The case of the prosecutor is to represent the rights of the citizens. This is assumed to be so because a crime is defined as an act or omission which constitutes an crime punishabl e by law. Hence, when an offender is presented in court, the charges levelled over against him read, Republic or render vs defendant. Therefore the fiber of the prosecutor is to represent the peoples cases against the defendant. With that role comes great responsibility on him, in that the burden of proof mechanically lies with him. alike he has to work hard to ensure that read is presented legally, and the differentiate procedures are adhered to in a way that dismissal is avoided. Another role of the prosecutor is that he acts as a consultant and advisor to the practice of law departments. He assists them in the course of investigations and also provides insight into the acquisition of raise and the procedural element of it. A prosecutor usually decides which case to dog based on the fact that whether they think they can prove beyond reasonable doubt that a defendant is guilty of an offense (Herrmann, Joachim, p. 468).They strive this by firstly studying in a detailed app earance the charges levelled against the defendant. Also he must examine the corresponding evidence presented which includes any testimonials or witnesses and any other material fact that may relate his case. After accomplishing this task he has a more(prenominal) insightful good deal of the case and is best able to make an informed decision. At this voice he may decide to file the case or destroy the charges and recommend lesser sentences for the defendants who agree to plead guilty to a genuine crime a process that is referred to as plea bargaining (Heumann, 1977).If the measure for taking a case was more crocked, many cases would be discount due to lack of concrete evidence. This is because majority of the cases brought to the court have circumstantial evidence but with great eyewitness testimony. If the criterion was less stringent on the other hand, the court system would be overburdened with cases scatty sufficient evidence and support, hence resulting in less attent ion be accorded to cases that urgently require it.The criminal justice system has been defined as resembling a funnel that is, being wide at the top and being narrow at the bottom. This is interpreted to mean that there are more queers and defendants in the justice system than there are convicted offenders who have successfully passed through the correctional system. The criminal justice system has a be of processes that an offender goes through, beginning with the investigation process and ending with the release of a convicted individual from a correctional facility.As criminals pass through the criminal justice system, quite a number of cases are dismissed due to a variety of reasons one being the lack of sufficient evidence. fineness is another effect brought about by the criminal justice funnel. legion(predicate) of the cases in the criminal justice system are investigated, tried or dismissed purely on the basis of personal choices. These choices are do by persons who us e discretion to decide on individual cases. Also police officers may decide whether to conduct investigations on a case or to just go ahead and make an arrest of the suspect, again based on personal choice.Whereas on the other hand, attorneys and judges also interpret information to decide on the bail applications and plea bargains (Hermann Joachim, p. 468). unreported cases is also another factor emerging form this system. A number of crimes go unreported for a variety of reasons and this allows the offenders of such crimes go off Scott free and mingle with other people in the society. This adds to the ever festering number of cases that do not make their way into the early stages and utmost stages of the criminal justice system.Case backlog means that the defendants have to deferral longer in order to loaf a verdict on the case. It means t the defendant has to remain as a suspect for a prolonged period. Some of the offenders that are held in custody are there because simply th e offenses they committed can not be minded(p) bail and other offenders are there because they have been unable to impale bail. This backlog also inhibits the justice process by helping offenders get away with their crimes. This is especially evident where case requires immediate analysis of evidence (Daly, 2011).