The Internationalization of Criminal Evidence - Report Example

Court Report Name: Institution: First Case The first case, which is preceded by Justice J BUTTON, is a case that involves R V John Visser preceded in the Common Law Court. The case, which commences at exactly 10 am, on 5th September, 2012, was in court 11D along the court of NSW 184 Philip Street, in Sydney. Background Following headline of one of the common newspapers, the Sydney Morning, on the date of 12/08/2012, it was reported that a certain man, by the name John Visser aged 61, was charged with an offence of involving in the world biggest elation haul of approximately 122 $ million. Heathcote, is reported to have be one of the people that were involved in the smuggling of 15 million of pills weighing around 4.4 tinned from a 3000 tomato cans, which occurred around 10:00a.m (Jackson & Summer, 2012). I was presence during the proceeding of the case, which took place at the Supreme Court, room D at Level 11. Room D was the best place for the proceeding to take place because it was more spacious in order to accommodate the in attendance. In the courtroom, the presence of the preceding judge, Judge J. BUTTON, was ready to take over the floor on the case. Apart from the judge, the presence of one of the assistance, whose work is to carry related documents that contain information relating to the case, which he presented to the judge. I also recognized the presence of a female court reporters. Her work was to record the court proceeding in hardcopy and in a softcopy through certain machine (Jackson & Summer, 2012). On the left side of the preceding judge was the court official, also referred as the court officer, whose purpose is to make sure that all the court lists are in order. On the side of the defendants, there were additional two police officers, who were present to take control of the defendants and to make sure that law and order existed during the proceeding process. By looking the set-up of the courtroom, it was clear that there were no juries to take part in the proceeding. In the company of a number of classmates, we got the opportunity to gather information from one of the Crown Barrister by the name Abdulkareem, who was in the company of his assistant lawyer. They informed us that they had a plan of transferring Mr. John Visser, who was the victim, from NSW to Melbourne in order to face other charges against him (Jackson & Summer, 2012). They also told us the victim is considered as one of the most wanted in the region as he also have to face some charges in State of Queensland because of committing other crimes. After taking our seats, we recognized the presence of other four court officers, whose work, as per our observation was to manage the court during the process. Apart from the four, there were two additional officers, whose work was to do the recording and filling of the proceeding. Moreover, the two officers were to submit any related document on contain information about the case in the question. The court officer at the private door, inform us to expect the judge in a few minutes. Soon, he alerted the people and as required by the court, we stood up, as a sign of respect, to welcome the judge to the courtroom. He entered the courtroom, broke the silence by greeting us in a lovely voice, and directed the barrister on the application to invite Mr. Visser (Jackson & Summer, 2012). In the process, he asked the victim if he has a lawyer who will help him to present the case. In his reply, the victim informed the judge that he did not have a lawyer because he lacked the funds to hire one. In order to exercise some of the rights of the accused, the judge informed the victim on the NSW free legal Aid Service, which according to the judge would be of great help in the absence of the lawyers. Mr. Visser rejected the offer by informing the judge that the organization is of no help to him. Judge then went straight to the point and asked the victim on his opinion on the application presented before him, of transferring him from NSW to Queensland. To his response, the accused informed the court that after that he does not accept the offer because he doubts the offer is valid. The barrister was requested to confirm the validity of the transfer, which would be supported by a copy of the script. The copy of the script was to compost of the court proceeding form the local procedures. This was not possible as the documents were not available at the time (Jackson & Summer, 2012). Therefore, the judge gave the barrister fifteen minutes to prepare the document. The judge adjourned the proceeding for the same period for the document to be prepared. After the 15 minutes, the judge gave the barrister the opportunity to present the document. In the process, the barrister asked the judge to adjourn the proceeding to 10/10/2012 in order to for them to have time to prepare the script. The judge later adjourns the proceeding to 31/10/2012 in order for the documents to be ready. Abuse of the process and the validity of the Warrant were read as the main issues of the next hearing. Second Case The second case, bearing the case number 452 of 2007, is conducted in the Common Law Civil Court, court 3 along King Street in Sydney. The case is about the Plaintiff name confidential and involves both Taylor and Scott as the lawyers to take part in the process. Background This case focuses on the on the neglect of the workers at their work place. It is recorded that there was a an accident that occurred in 2005, where the victim suffered a serious back injury, at the time of building one of their site, which is situated at Pacific ST North. The case began on the issues of workers compensation at the Oxford Street, where the claim was on the loss of wages and medical cost in case of inquiry (Jackson & Summer, 2012). When the medical practitioner examined the victim, he found that worker had an injury and needed some surgery. After the provision of the treatment by the doctor, the doctor reported that the victim had an impairment of 22% as per the rating of the in the WCC. Due to the impairment of the body of the victim, his lawyer decided to report the matter to the Common Law of Australia. According to the lawyer, the hearing of the case was to start on the 30/09/2012. During the second hearing, the plaintiff had the opportunity to provide evidence that supports the case in order for the company lawyer to examine the claims. Through the claims, the lawyer had the chance to know whether the claims of wages problems were based on facts on fictions (Jackson & Summer, 2012). During the period of case hearing, the 29 years old worker, who was the victim, had some negative impacts of the accident, which occurred around eight years from the time, has been going through a series of operations in order to have a better life. The lawyer presented the medical report to the judge. After examining the report, the judge approved the results by confirming that the location of the site and the working place is not environmental friendly making the site to be of no safe access system. Before the case was taken before the court for trial, both the parties were asked to come on one agreement and solve their grievances in order to settle the problem (Jackson & Summer, 2012). During their private meeting, the worker demanded for 750,000$ as a form of compensation for the case to be dealt with. For the company to settle the case in a very friendly way, the company lawyer accepted the demand from the injury. After the agreement, the two parties agreed to sign the agreement in the courtroom. This gave the court the mandate to issue both parties with a copy of the settlement order to confirm their agreement. I learnt various issues from the courtroom, for instance, all the judges made sure they have respect on the words they say. This is important because it gives the victims the opportunity to express their feelings freely with being harassed, hence, maintaining their freedom and rights. Another area that I found comfortable is the introduction of the modern technology in capturing the proceeding of the cases in the courtroom (Jackson & Summer, 2012). This is great improvement because it helps in capturing every part of the proceeding without much difficulty, resulting to accurate gathering of information. Moreover, the procedures that the Common Law Legal system uses to go through their proceedings are within the law and give the victims the opportunities to enjoy their rights and freedom, which gives me the desire to study law and work in such firms in order to be part in the proceedings. Reference: Jackson, J. D., Summer, S. J. (2012). The internationalization of Criminal Evidence: Beyond the Common Law and Civil Law Traditions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Read More