Court Report on the Acts on Trial - Essay Example

Court Report Court Report Legal s in the UK strive to deliver justice by convicting persons guilty of unlawful acts, resolving civil disputes in the society and interpreting the laws to concerned parties. The British legal system has a wide variety of legal institutions that perform different functions in administering justice. Tribunals are categorized in terms of the powers bestowed on them and depending on the complexity of the cases that they try. The Supreme Court is the highest legal system in the UK after it assumed the functions of the Scottish High Court of Justiciary (Legilation.gov.uk, 2005). The court tries and decides appeals from lower courts on matters of public concern to settle legal contentions and uncertainties surrounding the questions presented before the bench. This report aims at exploring the Acts applicable the trial of an accused depending on the crime committed. It outlines the activities regarding the relationship among the persons present in the courtroom during trial. It further explores the rights of the accused before conviction. During a court process, members of the public follow court proceedings from a public gallery to ensure the legal process open and transparent. Before accessing the gallery, those in attendance undergo rigorous security checks to ensure safety during the court process. Upon arrival in the courtroom, I accessed a list of cases being tried on that particular day. The trial involved a defendant charges on two accounts. On the first account, the defendant was facing charges of the possession of marijuana. On the second account was the intent of peddling and supply of the same. Under the UK drug act, possession and peddling of the drugs face penalties depending on the classification of the drug in question. Illegal drugs are categorized into different classes; hard drugs like cocaine and heroin are under class A and attract severe penalties. Marijuana and anabolic steroids are categorized under class B and attract lesser penalties compared to class A (UK Government, 2015). The drugs policy also stipulates different penalties for the intended use of the drugs. If an accused is arrested with large amounts of drugs and cash at the same time, he is charged for drug trafficking and distribution. That is a serious felony and can attract a life imprisonment sentence depending on the classification of the drug. The punishment also depends on factors such as geographical distribution of the substance. Considerations are applicable to defining whether minors were involved in trafficking or consumption of the substance. Because the accused faced charges under class B of the drug policy, the trial was conducted in a district court presided by a single Judge and a Jury of four magistrates of equal gender distribution. The selection of the Jurors is performed carefully to ensure the bench reflects all the faces of the society and the ethnic groups. The selection is aimed at ensuring that the defendant is not disadvantaged in any way during the trial. To ensure and professional trial, the appointed judge and jurors must meet certain set criteria. The law enforcers must have studied law, Christian Religious Education and Islamic Sharia laws to attain a Bachelor’s degree in Law. Besides, the Jurors must have at least two years practical experience as a judge or a lawyer in the jurisdiction of the drug court. The factors reflect the accused’s right to be fairly tried by a Jury. The UK laws outline fundamental rights to fair trial to which every citizen has an entitlement as provided in Chapter 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Legislation.gov.uk, 2015). The Public having settled in the public gallery, the defendant marched to the courtroom escorted by two police officers. He was directed to his dock where he sat waiting for the entrance of the Jurors that marks the onset of the trial. An accused person is innocent until proved guilty hence the accused appeared in the courtroom not handcuffed and neatly dressed. I noted the accused having a friendly conversation with the two police officers who were watching over him, signifying that he was still a free man exercising his right of speech and association before conviction. After a while, the accused’s lawyer arrived, exchanged a few words with him, and settled at the defense council’s table. That signified that the court was abiding by the fundamental right of the accused of being represented by a defense counsel in a trial. After a while the Jury arrived in the courtroom followed by judge, they were dressed in official court regalia symbolizing power of the supreme law, the prosecutor ordered everybody to rise in honor of the Judge and the supreme power of the court of law. After settling, the trial commenced immediately as scheduled to ensure the accused has his right to trial in a timely manner as per the law that stipulates fair trial. The prosecuting barrister introduced the case by swearing the Jurors and accused using Bible to ensure they were truthful in all their speeches as per the requirements of the court of law. He then reminded the Jurors of their core business of weighing evidence in order to determine the facts of the case for a fair trial. The Judge reminded the Jury to seek clarification and interpretation of the law from him in case of any difficulties. This meant there would be much interaction between the Judge and the Jury as I witnessed later in the process of the trial. The accused swore not guilty to all the two accounts accusation and trial kicked off in a heated debate with the accused not answering some questions during the cross –examination to demonstrate his right of remaining silent in some cases to avoid incriminating himself. At some point, the Judge expressed his dissatisfaction through facial expressions in the silence of the accused but did not have a choice since the accused was expressing his rights. The witnesses involved in the trial who were the police officers who arrested the accused testified to the satisfaction of the Jurors. However, some of the evidence presented was not satisfactory, as the forensic administration conducted on them did not link the accused with the drugs. The Defense barrister expressed his disappointment in the prosecution by charging an innocent citizen with dangerous drugs without fully ascertaining the credibility of the evidence. It was particularly interesting observing the Defendant barrister accusing the Prosecuting Barristers of providing false evidence against the defendant. That instigated an intense argument between the two sides with some instances becoming humorous causing loud laughter in the courtroom. Based the observation, I concluded that the Jurors have a difficulty in linking the testimonies of the witnesses to the acceptability of evidence presented. The observation is justified by report findings in 2010 that debarked claims that juries in the UK depict bias in their decisions (Travis, 2010). The report further dismissed common claims that white juries discriminate blacks in their verdicts (Sturke, 2010). For this reason, they spent part of the trial moving to the Judge’s desk to seek consultations. The Defending barrister tried to convince the Judge and the Jury to suspend the case for lack of substantial evidence. However, since the testimony had correctly linked the accused with the drugs, the Judge refused to suspend the case but released the accused on bail and ordered the prosecution to conduct an explicit investigation within two months. The accused and his lawyer seemed satisfied with the day’s ruling and promised a more vigorous defense in the next hearing. After adjournment of the case, the Jury left in with the Judge heading the team. The analysis presented in the report indicates that accused persons in UK have rights that take care of their entitlement to fairness from the time of arrest to conviction. That is evident by the manner in which the legal process handles criminals in various stages of law enforcement based on the provisions of the due process. The drug act that was our case of interest has demonstrated how criminals in the UK have their fundamental rights taken care of adequately by the rule of law. The categorization of the drugs in terms of class and consideration of factors surrounding drug abuse penalty ensures that offenders are convicted according to the weight of their offenses. The court process notably demonstrated a high command of respect to the rule of law by the law enforcers. Interaction between the accused and police officers is in order with the fundamental rights of free speech and association of the accused. The representation of the accused by the defense council shows how the trial process demonstrates a high command of law by ensuring a fair trial to the accused. The careful selection of the members of the Jury provides a reflection of the society and the ethnic groups according to the trial acts. The selection of qualified law professionals aims at providing the accused tried by those who are versed in the law hence fair trial. The public’s presence in the courtroom aims at winning trust of the people in the judiciary and the rule of law that governs them. References Legilation.gov.uk. (2005). UK Constitutional Reform Act 2005: The Supreme Court. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/4/part/3/crossheading/the-supreme-court Legislation.gov.uk. (2015). Human Rights Act 1998: Article 6. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/5 Sturcke, J. (2010, February 17). The main findings of the juries report. The Guardian. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/feb/17/juries-report-main-findings Travis, A. (2010, February 17). The verdict on juries: fair, effective and efficient. The Guardian. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/feb/17/juries-fairness-research UK Government (2015, January 29). Drugs penalties. Retrieved May 8, 2015 from https://www.gov.uk/penalties-drug-possession-dealing Read More