The Roles of the Courtroom Workgroup - Essay Example

Courtroom Workgroup Task Introduction A courtroom can be defined as a room whereby cases are heard and judged by a judge (May, 2008). Courtrooms are designed differently depending on the country and the case type. Therefore, it is logical to state that the work of the courtroom is to judge law offenders (Schmalleger, 2011). This study aptly evaluates the roles of the courtroom workgroup. In a court room, there is a group of people known as a courtroom work group (May, 2008). A courtroom work group is an unofficial understanding between the judicial officer, a criminal prosecutor and a criminal defense attorney (Schmalleger, 2011). The courtroom work group is unofficial since they have their own set standards upon their work that are unanimous and mutual. This is because the courtroom work group has little time for investigations and relies mainly on police and witness reports; this thus makes them case processors rather than justice dispensers. The courtroom workgroup has four basic concepts that it adheres to, which are pragmatic cynicism, speed, collegiality and secrecy (Schmalleger, 2011). The four virtues calls for the oath of loyalty between the courtroom work groups as importance are based on how healthy the working relationship is. To ensure the four components are adhered to the prosecutors and the defense attorneys just contrast charges against bureaucratic defects and plausible argument and make a decision. The contrasting of charges is to gauge the severity of the plea bargain. This abnormal way of finding justice happens because the courtroom work group, apart from having little time, has insufficient funds to necessitate investigations. Thus to shorten the case procedures they pressurize the defendant into pleading guilty to a lesser crime and thus get less time in the judgment (Schmalleger, 2011). Lack of time and money is due to the courtroom workgroup working for the public defenders. The courtroom work group has to labor jointly at a time as they do not have a choice. This is because they are pressurized by judges in courtrooms over delays (Schmalleger, 2011). There is also pressure to manage every public defender than private defenders thus it is easier to work together to ensure efficiency. The courtroom workgroup has a superb way of working out its daily activities by working together. In spite of this, there are a few areas which need improvement. In my opinion, I think that the manner in which the courtroom workgroup works together by comparing charges and coming up with a decision is unethical. They should try and bargain for an increase of a large workgroup to ensure enough time to handle the numerous cases. Secondly, the courtroom workgroup should insist on being allocated enough funds to enable them perform thorough investigations of their cases instead of relying on police reports and witnesses only as they can be incorrect. Lastly, I think that the courtroom workgroup can be divided to ease the burden face by the existing ones. One group can work in the courtrooms while the other group can conduct investigations and researches. This will in turn ensure that the public defenders are given a fair trial as the cases will be based on thorough research, rather than police reports and witnesses only. Prosecutors are lawyers deemed as the principal legal representatives in a court. Their work normally begins when a criminal has been charged. The prosecutor has three main tasks to perform in the court. The first task is to investigate the crimes after the criminal has been charged (May, 2008). The prosecutors work together with the police to investigate the suspect, the victim and witnesses. This is to ensure that there is enough incriminating evidence to prosecute the suspect. The second task of the prosecutor is to decide whether or not to instigate legal proceedings (Schmalleger, 2011). After gathering enough evidence in the crime and working closely with the police, the prosecutor judges whether the evidence is enough to charge the man in court. If the prosecutor finds that the crime is a minor crime and the suspect is a first time lawbreaker, or in the case where the suspect admits to the crime, a summary punishment is given. This means that the prosecutor is compelled to issue a fine to the suspect and no trial will be held in court. The third task is to appear in court if the prosecutor finds enough evidence to incriminate the suspect (May, 2008). Therefore in the court the prosecutors work is to prove that the suspect is indeed guilty of the crime charged against him or her. The prosecutor starts by first cross examining the suspect, the witnesses and other experts in ordered to prove that the suspect is guilty by all counts. Prosecutors have a certain legal way of determining which cases to pursue. One factor that determines a case to be pursued by the prosecutor is when there is a lot of evidence that is sufficient to incriminate the suspect (May, 2008). This is because the offence will not be placed under the fines department but a under a trial department. Although prosecutors have legal ways of determining cases to pursue some methods are private, selfish and unethical. Examples of factors that determine the cases that a prosecutor would pursue are cases that the prosecutor is sure he will win. Hence, a prosecutor will entirely drop a case if he thinks he might not win it this is because they want to maintain a high status in the corporate world. This is because for a prosecutor winning a case means climbing the corporate ladder while losing a case means a fall from the corporate ladder. Another factor is a high profile case with a lot of media coverage (Schmalleger, 2011). This gives a prosecutor the much needed attention and fame that enhances climbing of the corporate ladder. The climb comes in the form of bonuses, lucrative private practice and for political gains. In an instance when the criterion for taking a case was less stringent, prosecutors would generalize their practice to higher levels (Schmalleger, 2011). On the other hand, in an instance when the criteria for taking a case were more stringent prosecutors would specialize to greater levels to catch up with the workload. Furthermore, fewer criminals would be tried by prosecutors when such an instance occurs (May, 2008). Criminal justice funnel is the process through which the number of criminals charged is reduced until only a small number is left for trial (Schmalleger, 2011). It is the case where there are more suspects than inmates. Backlog of cases is a situation where there is a massive amount of caseload that the court can not handle in a timely manner, thus leading to delays (Schmalleger, 2011). This happens when the number of cases exceeds the capacity of the court (May, 2008). There are a number of effects caused by the criminal justice funnel and backlog on the court system. The advantages of criminal justice funnel are that it saves the courtroom workgroup and the court itself from being overburdened. Furthermore, with the decrease of cases in the docket the system saves money and time that could have been used on trials of suspects. On the other hand, some offenders who are considered less serious are put on probation. However, this does not mean that the funnel system lets criminals get away with crimes; in most cases, there is the lack of evidence to incriminate the suspects (May, 2008). There is a variety of solutions that can aid in eliminating funnel and reduce the backlog of cases. Firstly, time limits to be set upon which any case under that time limit will be dropped. Secondly, certain cases can be removed from key trials to different courts. An example is drug courts, since there are a rising number of drug offenders a different court can be put up to cater for them. Lastly, distinct tribunals and alternative dispute resolution can be introduced to handle cases from different specified ways instead of one place. For example, each state can have more courtrooms to manage the backlog and funnel of cases. Conclusion In conclusion, the courtroom is an enclosed significant room where suspects are judged according to gathered evidence. The court has a group of courtroom workers who work hand in hand to ensure that case against public defenders is taken care off in time. The role of the prosecutor as demonstrated above is to investigate a crime, come to a decision whether to pursue it based on the evidence gathered and form a trial or penalize the suspect. Although this is the normality prosecutors have unorthodox ways of determining case to pursue. Examples are taking high profile case, cases with high media coverage and cases they are sure to win. This is because prosecutors have to build corporate status for their own selfish interests like bonuses, political gains and promotions References Schmalleger, Frank J. (2011). Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text for the 21st Century, Student Value Edition. Prentice Hall. May, D. C. (2008). Corrections and the criminal justice system. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Pub. Read More