Phases of a Trial: Choosing a Jury - Essay Example

Phases of a Trial Choosing a Jury/ Jury Selection This is the first phase of a criminal trial. It is a screening process and is referred to as voir dire. During this phase, the judge explains the principles or law to the prospective jurors; reads them the accusatory instrument and questions them in general and regarding the particular case’s issues such as life experiences or personal ideological propensities that may pertain to the case. The questioning of the jurors aims at determining their suitability to serve in a certain case. Through the questions, the judge can identify whether a juror may have certain personal knowledge or partiality that could manipulate his or her ability to pass judgment in a case objectively (Menard 8&9). Based on the potential jurors’ responses to questioning, the judge can excuse them at this stage. In addition, using challenges ‘for cause’ and ‘peremptory challenges,’ both the prosecution and the defense may leave out some jurors at this stage. A judge can use a peremptory challenge to leave out a juror for any non-discriminatory cause. On the other hand, the judge can use a challenge for cause to leave out a juror who has proved that he/she cannot be truthfully objective in the decision of a case (“Trial” 1). Menard explains that the questioning process goes on until all parties’ attorneys become satisfied with the jury’s composition or exhausts all challenges that law permits. To make sure that there are enough jurors for deliberation, alternate jurors are essential. The judge decides when to excuse alternate jurors (9). 2. Opening Statements After jury selection, the first dialogue at trial is in the form of two opening statements, one from the defense and the other from the prosecutor on government’s behalf. At this stage, no physical evidence is used and no witnesses testify. The prosecutor gives his/her opening statement first and in most cases, it is more detailed than that of the defense since the government has the ‘burden of proof’ as to the guilt of the defendant. In some cases, prior to making its opening statement, the defense may wait until the main case of the government comes to conclusion. During the opening statements, the prosecutor submits the case’s facts, from the perspective of the government, and takes the judges through the proof that the government will make. Additionally, the defense presents its own interpretation of the facts to the jury, and establishes the basis for the presentation of any legal defenses to the charged crime(s) and the rebuttal of key government evidence (“Trial” 1). 3. Plaintiffs Evidence Unified Judicial System Jurors explain that in this phase, the plaintiffs lawyer calls witnesses and each of them takes an oath before testifying. During the examination, the witness may offer exhibits as evidence in the trial. If the judge decrees that the exhibits will be received into evidence, they are taken into the jury room during deliberation following examination. In some cases, jurors may leave the courtroom under court supervision to inspect a certain object or site. During the examination of a witness, direct examination by the plaintiffs lawyer comes first. Cross-examination of the witness by the defendants lawyer follows. In general, the latter is limited to questions regarding matters arising from the former. The plaintiffs lawyer may once more question the witness subsequent to cross-examination (referred to as redirect) and re-cross examination may follow this. This process continues until the evidence of the plaintiff reaches the jury. At this point, the plaintiffs lawyer states to the court: ‘Plaintiff rests’ (3). 4. Defendants Evidence At this phase, the defendant calls witnesses to defend against the plaintiff’s claim or to prove the counterclaim if any. The defendants attorney examines the witnesses first on direct examination, which is followed by cross-examination by the plaintiffs lawyer. Likewise, the defendants case continues until the defendants lawyer declares, ‘Defendant rests’ (Unified Judicial System 7&8). 5. Rebuttal and Rejoinder Rebuttal is whereby the plaintiff calls witnesses to give response to testimony given in the case of the defendant. This is followed by a rejoinder whereby the defendant responds pleading to the plaintiffs reply/replication (Mueller & Kirkpatrick 822). 6. Closing Arguments In this phase, the defense and the government get the opportunity of summarizing the case, recapping the evidence in a light that is in favor with their respective positions. This is the final opportunity for the parties to speak to the jury before deliberations. Subsequently in closing arguments, the government seeks to demonstrate why the proof necessitates the judges to find the defendant guilty. The defense in turn tries establishing that the government has inadequate proof so that the judges must find the defendant ‘innocent’ (“Trial” 2). 7. Jury Instruction In this phase, the judge gives a set of legal standards to the jury founded on the evidence present on trial and the injury claims at issue. Oftentimes, this process occurs with input and argument from the defense and prosecution. The judge then instructs the jury on the findings necessary in order to get to certain conclusions. Additionally, the judge describes key concepts like ‘guilt beyond a reasonable doubt’ and based on the evidence presented at trial, defines any crimes that the jury may consider (“Trial” 2). 8. Deliberation In this phase, court bailiffs are sworn to take charge and the jury withdraws to decide the issues. Unified Judicial System Jurors explain that Jurors carry a copy of the courts instructions, their recollection of the witnesses’ testimony as well as the exhibits introduced at the trial. After having reached a verdict, the jury returns to the courtroom (15). 9. Entry of Judgment/the Verdict On reaching a verdict, the jury foreperson notifies the judge who in turn announces the verdict in open court. However, in case the jury fails to reach a verdict unanimously and finds itself at a standstill, the judge may announce a mistrial, following which the trial may start afresh from the jury selection phase or there may be a dismissal of the case (“Trial” 2). Works cited Menard, John. Sub-Board I, Inc., 2001. Web. 13 Sept. 2010. Mueller, Christopher B. and Laird C. Kirkpatrick. Evidence: Practice under the Rules. New York: Aspen Publishers, 1999. Print. “Trial.” FindLaw.com. FindLaw, 2010. Web. 13 Sept. 2010. Unified Judicial System. Stages of the Trial, ujsjurors.sd.gov, 2008. Web. 13 Sept. 2010. Read More