Criminal Court Observation Examples
Additionally, while completing court observations I had the opportunity to sit in on three separate criminal trials. The first trial I sat in on was a case involving sexual assault where the defendant was accused of “violating of the sexual integrity” (Arcaro, 2009, p.151) while she was sleeping. Due to the sensitive nature of the case, a publication ban was put in place. The judge allowed us to sit in on the case, but made aware to the students sitting in that we were not to publish any names or talk to the media regarding anything we heard or saw. Court commenced that morning with the Judge explaining to the witness (the complainant) that they were continuing the trial from the day before, and that she was still under oath. Immediately the
…show more content…
Although I was only able to sit in on the first 30 minutes of the trial, I was exposed to a many class theories. The first witness called to the stand, and the only witness that I had the chance of hearing from, was a Guns and Drugs Detective in charge of a Team. This police officer had specialist status. As previously stated, s specialist refers to branches “outside uniform policing [that] have a narrower focus and require more specific skills and knowledge” (Arcaro, 2009, p.22). By becoming part of the Guns and Drugs Unit, this detective gave up regular uniform policing to focus on one area of concern. He is specially trained and has gained valuable knowledge over his years in the unit. His specialist status also affected the reliability of the officer’s statements. Gino Arcaro defines reliability as “the credibility of the person’s observations” (Arcaro, 2009, p.191). Since the Detective has been working within the Guns and Drugs Unit for many years, his hands on experience and knowledge makes his evidence credible. By answering questions from the Crown, the officer provided direct evidence through oral testimony while corroborating using his notes, as well as notes from notes from a central note taker to refresh his memory. What was unique about this court observation experience was the opportunity to view the best evidence rule in a court case. The best evidence rule was put into place during this trial as there were items too big, or impractical to bring into court so a substitution was allowed. In this case, the crime scene was too big and simply not practical therefore photos and diagrams were brought in instead as secondary evidence, which is “the next best substitution that replaces the original item” (Arcaro, 2009, p.112). The crown brought the original photos, copies of the photos, and digital copies of the photos to demonstrate as secondary evidence before the
Although I was only able to sit in on the first 30 minutes of the trial, I was exposed to a many class theories. The first witness called to the stand, and the only witness that I had the chance of hearing from, was a Guns and Drugs Detective in charge of a Team. This police officer had specialist status. As previously stated, s specialist refers to branches “outside uniform policing [that] have a narrower focus and require more specific skills and knowledge” (Arcaro, 2009, p.22). By becoming part of the Guns and Drugs Unit, this detective gave up regular uniform policing to focus on one area of concern. He is specially trained and has gained valuable knowledge over his years in the unit. His specialist status also affected the reliability of the officer’s statements. Gino Arcaro defines reliability as “the credibility of the person’s observations” (Arcaro, 2009, p.191). Since the Detective has been working within the Guns and Drugs Unit for many years, his hands on experience and knowledge makes his evidence credible. By answering questions from the Crown, the officer provided direct evidence through oral testimony while corroborating using his notes, as well as notes from notes from a central note taker to refresh his memory. What was unique about this court observation experience was the opportunity to view the best evidence rule in a court case. The best evidence rule was put into place during this trial as there were items too big, or impractical to bring into court so a substitution was allowed. In this case, the crime scene was too big and simply not practical therefore photos and diagrams were brought in instead as secondary evidence, which is “the next best substitution that replaces the original item” (Arcaro, 2009, p.112). The crown brought the original photos, copies of the photos, and digital copies of the photos to demonstrate as secondary evidence before the