Topical Blog due Thursday 3/8 @ midnight

I am one of the two prosecuting attorneys for this semester’s mock trial. So far, my role has had no direct involvement in the class, but soon enough I will have plenty of involvement. The main reason that I have had no involvement is because the prosecutor does not become involved until the police have built a case that the D.A.’s office feels is convictable. I have learned that prosecutors are responsible for collecting and sorting the evidence in order to create a convictable case against a defendant. Although my role has not had anything to do with the class yet, I have learned quite a bit about the position that I hold through my book report. The book that I read was called “The Prosecutors.” I chose this book because I felt that it would help me immensely with my role. The book was written by a reporter named Gary Dehlsohn, who was working in Sacramento, California. He was able to spend one year as a “fly on the wall” in the city’s District Attorney’s Office. During the course of the year, there were a few cases that went through that he wrote about. While reading this book, I really learned a lot about how the district attorney’s office works.

In a district attorney’s offices, there are many different people with many various jobs. The first is the District Attorney, who is an elected official and acts as the boss. Many times, before an arrest can be made, the police come to the District Attorney and present a case stating why the individual should be charged with a certain crime. The District Attorney can then decide that he or she would like to file charges against the individual or tell the police that they need more evidence for the case to be prosecutable. In my book, the District Attorney’s name was John O’Mara and he had been doing the job for many of years and was much respected. He was also known to be quite demanding; if the police wanted an individual convicted, they sure better bring him everything he needed. In this story, John O’Mara never actually went to trial and prosecuted someone. This happens in real life as well; the District Attorney many times just oversees the other prosecutors. The District Attorney is not the only attorney in the office; there are usually many other prosecutors working for the office. These are called Assistant District Attorneys. Since the city in which the story in my book took place, Sacramento, is quite large, there were quite a few attorneys working for this office. There are also investigators that work for the District Attorney’s Office that go out and find people that do not show up for court or basically anyone who does not show up that has been subpoenaed. I learned through this book that being a prosecutor can be a very stressful job. Every day, they are forced to deal with the most violent people living in their district. They also must come up with plea bargains that can save the state a lot of money by not going to trial. Sometimes, prosecutors are criticized for offering this plea bargains because victims/the community feel that these are unfair deals in the criminal’s favor.

I have also learned that one of the jobs of being a prosecutor is to work as an advocate for the victim. It is their job to work for the victim in order to receive restitution money for crimes committed against an individual.

I have also had personal experience with a prosecutor in Polk County. About six months after a violent crime was committed against me, I was contacted by an assistant prosecutor. I was later subpoenaed for a deposition in which I had to sit down in a room with the prosecutor, two of the defense attorneys, and two of the defendants. It was definitely not a very comfortable situation. The defense asked me many questions while the prosecutor took notes. About a month later, I was subpoenaed again to go to trial. At the trial, I was asked question by the prosecutor that were supposed to paint a picture of me as being an upstanding citizen that was victimized by a ruthless criminal. Some of the questions that were asked were: “So, you go to college? How far are you in college? How did you feel while the crime was taking place? Do you recognize this IPOD? Do you recognize this car? Etc.” The defendant was later found guilty and sentenced to prison. The rest of the defendants pled guilty. (Thankfully, because it was quite a hassle to continue returning to Des Moines) Recently, I received a letter from the D.A. stating that I would be receiving restitution money.

Here is an article that I found that tells exactly what a prosecutor does. It explains various jobs that the district attorney does and different departments of the District Attorney’s Office.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-district-attorney.htm

Here is the website of the Blackhawk county District Attorney’s Office. The District Attorney in Blackhawk County is Tom Ferguson. http://co.black-hawk.ia.us/depts/attorney.html The Blackhawk County District Attorney’s Office Website isn’t quite as fancy as the Polk County District Attorney’s Website:

http://www.polkcountyiowa.gov/attorney/pages/sarcone.aspx

The Polk County District Attorney is John Sarcone. If you go to think link above, it has a whole profile about John Sarcone. In 2014, his term will end.

I am one of the two defense attorneys. So far my role has not come into play in the classroom. We have talked a little about some defenses I can use like the insanity plea. It isn’t time for me to be involved in the murder because of the fact that they haven’t found the culprit yet, or so I know of. Once they do find the culprit I will be called to defend him in court. I don’t know a whole lot about being a defense attorney. I have learned more by going to class, the movie primal fear, and outside research I have done.

The movie primal fear gave me some good knowledge on the general aspect of being a defense attorney. It showed him talking his client and saying don’t tell me more than I need to know. I think that is a wise decision because I wouldn’t want to know more about the case than I needed to get him a fair verdict. Also in the movie I was able to see the back and forth between the defense attorney and the prosecuting attorney. I think that knowing how that works will be important.

This week we learned about the insanity defense. I found it interesting to learn about the different types of defenses that are used in court. I learned about the insanity defense, Automatism defense, diminished capacity defense, and the intoxication defense. I learned that the insanity defense basically never works and that you should only pursue that defense if you have all the evidence you will need and you think you can persuade the jury. The automatism defense is another type of defense that has to do with momentary, involuntary actions. This is also known as crimes of passion. Diminished Capacity is for if you think your client is insane, but you don’t have enough evidence to prove it. This is a good way to still get the verdict you want. Intoxication defense is a defense that really shouldn’t ever be used because of the way the jury reacts to it. It isn’t something that anyone would sympathize with.

Since I now know from the media that the crime was a murder I looked up information that would be good for me to know when creating my case later. I found the website: http://www.criminalattorney.com/murder/. On this website I was able to find out that in murder conviction there are about three possible outcomes. They are life imprisonment with/without parole, death penalty, or fines and other punishments and penalties. The severity of the punishment will be based on a number of different factors like: prior criminal record, status of probation/parole, general community attitude towards the crime, and aggravating/mitigation circumstances. Now the murder defense information on this website gave me some good ideas for when I have to be put to the test. I learned that experienced attorneys will use numerous amounts of defenses to get a better outcome. Some defenses that I could use are self-defense, insufficient proof or evidence, factual innocence, insanity, and others.

I found a website that told me what the critical roles are of the defense attorney. The website is http://ezinearticles.com/?Our-Criminal-Courts---The-Role-of-Defense-Counsel&id=487513. I learned through this website that my job is to explain to my client what is going on and to make sure he or she knows there rights. I have to make sure that I protect my client because it is in the law that he or she has rights. My job is to protect those rights. I will deal with the prosecution, call and examine any witnesses in court, and do all that I can to keep my client from harm.

Overall I am excited for my part to get started because I know it is going to be a lot of hard work, and I just want to get started.

I am a jury member in our mock trial. Now going through this class my role has not yet played a role within the crime. My role will not take place until we are in the so called “court house”. Now what I have learned since my last essay fits in more with how the jury convicts depending on a confession. The juries will more than likely always convict the suspect of the crime if there is a confession. Now what we learned that even if the person confesses falsely, and then try to retract that statement the jury will still convict that suspect. This is most surprising when the evidence isn’t even strong. All that matters is that the jury will get blinded by the fact there was a confession. Now on to other things about the jury would be how the jury is selected. for this reason they have put many innocent people behind bars for long periods of time.

What I learned in my criminal courts class with Dr. Briggs was the process of picking a jury. This jury is supposed to be impartial and representative of the suspect’s peers. Now as hard as the courts tried to make regulations on picking a jury it is very much biased because the jury members are handpicked at the very end of the process. Now one thing that is comical about that is the people they tend to get off the jury and some of those are due to race of profession. Now we have kind of touched basis on some of the questioning they ask the jury. First of all the reason they ask the jury questions is to make sure they get an impartial jury. They want to try to get the most unbiased jury as possible. So they ask certain questions about beliefs or having past situations that might resemble this certain crime. If it does in some way you will be booted from consideration right away.

My role in this case is the that of the judge. I have not been able to play any part in the case so far, but I continue to learn about the aspects of my role from class, movie blogs, and research. So far, I have been keeping up with the media reports in order to understand the initial details of what is going in the case. These photos can certainly give me some insight into the psychological motivations of the perpatrator based on the knowledge I have developed in class. Although I will be acting as an unbiased source, knowing this information can certainly help for me to understand possible suspects. This case should be very interesting as it continues to develop, and I look forward to working with the prosecution and defense as they construct their cases.

As the judge in this case, I need to be able to act as both a professional and unbiased source within the court room. It is my job to understand and act on what components of the defense and prosecution's arguments to allow or strike from the record. It is very important that I continue to stay up to date on all the case details. This will prevent me from becoming ignorant in different components of the case, and having a complete understanding of all the elements of the case from its initial beginnings to my final sentencing. A large part of my role will involve coordinating with the two defense and two prosecuting attorneys as they develop their cases.

As this case continues to progress, the investigation will develop a full report and eventually attain a suspect. Once charges are formally brought against the suspect the defense and prosecution will start to construct their cases. It is my job to monitor the construction of both sides cases. I have to do this in order to determine whether evidence and arguments being used by both sides is allowable or problematic. If I do not do my role properly and mistakenly permit some problematic evidence it could lead to a momentous switch in the case. It is crucial that I interpret the laws and evidence involved with the case to the greatest degree of accuracy possible.

Other than the knowledge on my role that I have learned through class and my personal experience, I've been able to pick up some information up through the internet. In the United States the legal system as an adversarial setup, in which the defense and prosecution compete against one another to attain a victory in the trial. However, as the judge I am the sole position within the courtroom that acts as a nuetral interpretor of the law. If I were to take part within the competing sytle of the defense and prosecution I would compromise my role and the case itself. In addition to remaining a nuetral source, I have the responsiblity of controlling the procedure of the trial within the courtroom. Things have to remain orderly and professional at all times within hearings. Overall, I act as the directing source within the courtroom, the cases of both the defense and prosecution, and the final sentencing of the case.
http://www.cscja-acjcs.ca/role_of_judge-en.asp?l=5

I'm really excited to start fufilling the processes of my role in this case. Dealing with the prosecution and defense attorneys should be very interesting. Until my role becomes really active within the case, I will continue to stay up to date on all the other aspects that are occurring. The crime has been committed. Now it is time to delegate the justice necessary.

I struggled a lot with this assignment. I feel like there is only so much information I could find on the role of a character witness that I didn’t write about before in our first topical role essay blog. However, it is still important to look at what I have already learned and what I already knew about a character witness. Their job is to humanize either the defense or the victim. The character witness on the defense has a much harder job than the one who is playing for the prosecutor’s side. The character witness on the defense has a goal to make the jury realize that this suspect is a person. He or she is an actual human being who either A) could never do such a crime because of what great character they have or B) makes mistakes, it was an accident, it was justified, etc. They need to take the story that is forming in the minds of the jury and twist it into a light where the suspect doesn’t look half bad. Then there is the character witness for the prosecuting side. They have about the exact opposite job of the character witness playing for the defense. They want to create overwhelming sympathy in the jury for the victim. They could do this by testifying that the witness was such a wonderful person and would never do this. Another angle they may have is to focus on themselves and what a huge loss they have suffered from losing the victim. Whether the character witness is on the prosecuting or the defense side, they can be very impactful in a case.
http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/character-witness/
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/character+witness
http://www.torontocriminaldefence.com/articles/EpZuVVupVVUelCeYDy.php

One of the things I found out was that not all of character witness statements are in trial. Sometimes they use written statements. Now I’m sure this won’t happen in our case, because where would the fun in that be? But I did find it interesting. I feel as though a written statement would not be as strong as someone actually going to court and testifying. If a jury just reads a piece of printed paper or has it read to them, what good does it really do? Anyone can write anything down on a piece of paper. What makes a character witness so important is that it humanizes the defense or the victim. As I said above, a character witness’ goal is to create sympathy and understanding for the accused or victim. They are there to show the jury that this is a real person and not just a figment or a character. If I ever get roped into doing jury duty, a pierce of paper sure isn’t going to convince me of much. That is why the testimony on a stand from the character witness is so crucial.
http://www.ehow.com/how_4928647_write-good-character-witness-statement.html

It is important to know though, that not all of character witnesses can be beneficial to the case. This is especially true when we look at character witnesses for the defense (which is what most people think about when they think of character witnesses in the first place). Sometimes character witnesses won’t help at all, and can even do more damage than good to the defense’s case. This is because the prosecuting attorneys are given the opportunity to cross examine the character witness. This means they get the opportunity to question the character witness about the defendant. The prosecutors goal is to raise doubt in the character witnesses’ credibility with the jurors. Unfortunately, this isn’t exactly hard to due. As we all know from our own personal experiences, it is easier to remember and focus on the negative rather than the positive. So even though a character witness may have loads of positive information on the defendant, all the prosecuting attorney has to do is remind the jury of the bad deeds at hand, and then the character witness loses credibility.
http://www.apa.org/monitor/may04/crossexam.aspx

My role in the mock crime is a crime scene investigator. Before actually researching and learning about this profession I had little information about the roles of a CSI besides the ones showed in popular TV shows and movies. On this last Tuesday, March sixth the crime happened. We were called to the scene shorting after it was reported to the police. From previous research I learned that CSI's can be called out on the job day or night whenever and during whatever conditions. I was nervous when we were called to the scene trying to remember the step by step process a CSI should follow. Upon arrival my other CSI and I inspected the scene and everything around it that could possibly be evidence. I started to take pictures so we would know exactly how the body was positioned, where it was located, and other pictures that would be helpful later in the investigation. Next, we started trying to use the finger printing kit to possibly lift some fingerprints off of the door located right next to the body where the perpetrator would have exited out of. This proved to be a very difficult task. I don't know if we didn't read the directions close enough or didn't apply the correct amount of powder to the location but when we pulled up the tape provided in the kit we came up with no actual fingerprints. I was surprised by this because on TV shows and movies it always seems like they are not hard to collect, so I learned that was one thing thats exaggerated. After this we started documenting this evidence and placing it in evidence bags to preserve it. This was my least favorite part of the job. There was quite a bit of information that needs to be filled out in order to know exactly where it came from, a description of the evidence, who collected it, when (date), and other necessary bits of information for documentation. There was so many different items in the CSI bag it was hard to know what everything was for. Had I known what was all in there beforehand and how to use everything I could have probably collected better evidence. After some documentation I started collecting some blood evidence from different locations. One of the major roles a CSI does is collecting evidence and preserving it without contamination. This was more difficult than I had expected. There was only limited bags that could hold evidence. The evidence also determined what kind of storage would be needed for the evidence for example, you need something thats not paper for liquid (blood) evidence. Even though we had learned the duties of a crime scene investigator and I reviewed them right before class started it was hard to remember what all needs to be done and how to go about everything to prevent contamination. Ive learned that after all the evidence is collected that the CSI takes it to the lab to be analyzed then completes a report about all of the evidence. They often testify in court as well as an expert. From my experience, it would have benefitted me to have had previous experience. If someone were wanting to pursue a career in this field I believe it would be very important to follow an experienced CSI agent around for sometime to be able to pick up on some of the important details and duties that are involved with this job. The evidence collected can hopefully be used to put the perpetrator behind bars as punishment but if an unexperienced CSI doesn't preserve the evidence the conviction could be jeopardized. After doing some more research about my role after the first role essay was written I learned that theres two types of evidence that can be collected at a scene: physical and testimonial. The physical evidence serves the purpose as: proving a crime was committed, establish key elements of the crime, link a suspect with a scene or victim, establish identity of victim and/or suspects, and exonerate the innocent. Another role of CSI's that I learned more about was when sketching up a scene they sometimes have to use exact measurements. I learned that to become a CSI you have to first be a police officer which requires a bachelors degree in most cases.
http://www.crime-scene-investigator.net/dutydescription.html
http://crimesceneinvestigator.com/

My role is that of a police officer in the mock crime and trial. The police officer(s) are the first to the scene of a crime and as I have learned there are many responsibilities of the police officer while at the scene.

The first duty of the police officer at the scene of a crime is to attend to any victims who need medical assistance and the time of arrival on the scene needs to be recorded. The scene needs to be secured and all paths of exit and entry need to be noted. The next step is to identify the perpetrator, if they are not at the scene officers need to ask witnesses where the perpetrator went. The type of crime needs to be determined and officers need to broadcast an updated description of the incident. Next witnesses need to be identified, separated, and instructed to avoid discussing the details of the incident. Once the officer is one on one with a witness it is important to make the witness comfortable to obtain the most accurate information. All of the information obtained from the witness needs to be documented and it is important to encourage the witness to contact investigators with any more information.

I followed the steps above during the mock crime which occurred on Tuesday. As the first officer on the scene there was a lot going on but I made sure to take it one step at a time. I recorded time of arrival then had to get the media out of the area. Detectives arrived at the scene at the same time I did so we separated the witnesses and each begin obtaining information from them separately. I made note of everything the witness told me and asked open ended questions such as “what can you tell me about the perpetrator?” After I was done with the witness and told him to not discuss any information relating to the crime with other witnesses I began to canvass the area for any additional clues I could find. The immediate area of the crime was marked off and just CSI and detectives were in there but since there was nothing else I could do in terms of normal police work I tried to help the detectives look around the building. Once the trial begins I’m sure I’ll be called to the stand and will answer questions pertaining to information I obtained from the witness and what I saw.

3/8/2012
Jury Duty:
I am a member of the jury for the mock trial that will be taking place in class. For this blog I will break down what I know into three parts. Part I is what I knew about jury duty before taking this class. Part II is what I have learned about jury duty since being in this course. Part III will cover my research about being a jury member.
Part I
I knew very little about being a jury member before taking this course. What I did know came from personal accounts (people telling me their stories) and movie/television shows. In general I knew that a jury is made up of everyday people – from the public. I thought they had some sort of interview process where potential jury members were asked to come in and answer questions. These questions would pertain to what kind of background knowledge one had. Where they currently work, previously worked, what types of experiences they had either with loved or themselves – all asking about things related to the case. If these persons had knowledge in the case, a relationship with someone involved, or were indirectly involved then they would not be asked to be on that particular jury. Before this case I thought it was important and upheld that there be no bias in the jury. For example if the defendant was a young black male then the jury would not be made up of all white people or all females. A jury of one’s peers means that they will have something in common with these individuals – similar life styles, background, etc. I was not sure who got to make these decisions or who would be asking the questions. I was not sure not sure how one could be to get a bias jury (who is in charge and who could make this happen- this will be readdressed in section II). I also knew that missing or not showing up for jury duty is a big deal! That is why my parents got to miss work, why teachers were gone from school, etc. growing up it always seemed like such a big deal that it was an excused absence. Then you were ‘on call’ in case you were chosen for jury duty. You had to stay in the area and listen carefully to messages, keep yourself available – all that made it seem very important.
Now these are the impressions that I got from others and from watching movies. I was not sure how accurate someone else’s stories were (maybe they exaggerated because they had to miss something important) or how much liberty writers took in order to spice up their stories.
Part II
I have learned a lot about jury duty (and entire court proceedings) during class meetings and through our assignments – blogs and the book report. My book report is not due until the end of this month, but once I started reading it, Echo from Dealey Plaza by Abraham Bolden, I couldn’t put it down; so I have already finished it. This book is an autobiography by the first black man to be in the secret service. He was not on duty when JFK was assassinated, but he had been guarding the president just previous. I am not very good at summarizes in short so I will avoid referencing the plot/story line. I will strictly talk about this book in terms of the jury(s). In this book it stated that the jury was not to discuss this case with anyone outside the courtroom (I was under the impression that they were not supposed to talk about with each other either until deliberation, but I may have gotten this wrong). Also in this book it seemed like the judge has an awful lot of control over the jury. Even though they are not to discuss anything privately (without attorneys from either/both sides present or state their opinion to the jury in a way that will sway them or imply that they should think/say the same).
While this book I was under the impression that all the information that is present to the jury is filtered through the defense, prosecution, as well as the judge. In class Dr. MacLin mentioned that all of the definitions relevant to the case and definitions of legal jargon that may be used is supplied is chosen and given to the jury by someone in the court, probably the judge. These already leave room for bias. This is also a lot of reading for jury members. Jury members have jobs, family, lives, outside of this court case. They may not have time to get through all of that information thoroughly or understand it fully. Being selected to be a juror requires no background in law or the court system/proceedings (sometimes that is what is preferred by the defense or both sides – the less ones knows the more easily they may be swayed). To me it seems like a tricky and stressful situation. Everyday people are thrown into these situations and must learn quickly a large amount of information and then they have to make important judgments based on that information.
Also in the Echo from Dealey Plaza, and it was mentioned in class, at times during a court proceedings something is said or done and the jury is instructed to forget what they have just witnessed. This is a very ignorant thing to say. Once we have experienced something we have cognitively processed this information – we will remember it and it will have an influence and interact with the information that is already being stored in the out memory. The way I see this is that when someone tells me to forget something I will remember it more clearly. I would start to think- why would they want to forget this? How is this not relevant? How is this information going to persuade deliberation and eventually the verdict? I would dwell on this information until it was set in my memory instead of being out of my memory.
I learned a lot about certainty of the jury from reading Bolden’s book and from class discussions. I did not realize that the entire jury had to agree on a verdict. It had been suggested in certain movies that I had seen (deliberation was not a main part of the plot, it seemed, so they did not give that much detail). It also never came up in my acquaintances recounts of their experience with jury duty. In the book Bolden’s verdict took much longer than anyone realized because one woman refused to agree with the others (and rightfully so). I was under the impressions that the jury’s verdict was a majority ruling. If more than half thought one way then that was the verdict. In hind sight this seems very stupid and I’m glad that our court system does not work like this. I have also learned a lot about the amount of certainty that one should have in either a civil or criminal case. In class we discussed burden of proof. In a criminal case burden of proof should be in the 90-95% range whereas, in civil cases it just barely has to be the majority 51%. I found this to be very interesting and I was not aware of these percentages.
Part III
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Who_chooses_the_jury_in_a_court_case
This site discussed the overall process of that the just goes through. It starts with how we get selected. Out personal information (voting registration, license information) that is collected or on record and every few years out names will be selected from a database and we will be put into a pool. We are asked questions from both defense and prosecution attorneys to see whether or not we would be a ‘good fit’ for a juror on this trial.
http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/juror.htm
This site is for jury members that reside in New Jersey. It goes through the general information that we had discussed in class. I talks about the importance of a jury member and all of the information that one is required to know in order to be a competent juror (I think these are things that we should be aware of as U.S. citizens, but I had very little prior knowledge of the information that was included in this document). This site discussed the differences between criminal and civil court cases and their requirements with the burden of proof. In document it says that in a criminal trial the jury is not responsible for coming up with the sentence only in civil trials is that the case. I wonder if these proceedings are true for all states or if this is strictly for New Jersey. I think it is interesting and apparently common for most Americans to have little knowledge of court proceedings. We could see this is a bad thing – we are uneducated about our own country’s judicial system or we could see as a good thing that we do not have this knowledge because we do not get in trouble with the law very often. Hopefully, but unlikely I would like to think we are the later.
I have not had to play a role in the crime for mock trial yet, as I am a jury member. However I will pay much closer attention to the information that we are given from the judge and I’ll be more carefully with the amount of certainty I have while deliberating.

I am one of the police officers in this trial. We have already begun our involvement in the case. On Tuesday, the crime took place. We reported to the location of the crime and began to do our duties. First, we cleared the area and made sure that the area was safe. By surveying the area, we were able to determine there was no immediate threat to the scene. Next, we identified and separated the witness. We proceeded to interview them, and collect their statements.
Walking into this role was a little difficult. Without previous experience, I wasn’t sure how to handle a situation. I often asked myself what we were to do next, or if we were doing it right. I think it takes a lot of confidence to walk into a crime scene and access the area. I also felt like I should be doing something. After we secured the scene and did the initial responses, we hung around waiting for CSI to do their job. We assessed the path that the perpetrator was claimed to take; however, there was not much else to do due to the very low key scene. If it were real life, I would have been controlling spectators and keeping the crime scene uncontaminated. Something else that was very common thought was how there were so many options or places the suspect can go. I repeatedly had to realize that this was just like real life, only this is smaller scale.
Seeing’s how our role has already started, I decided to research more about what a police officer does after the initial crime scene. IT was really difficult to find information about what an officer’s responsibility were after the crime had been committed. All the websites listed the different duties that a police officer held. The first website I found that gave more than duties, was very short. However, it gave a general basis of what they do. Officers give a testimony during the court process and work on follow up investigations. They also protect the evidence.
http://www.ncvc.org/ncvc/AGP.Net/Components/documentViewer/Download.aspxnz?DocumentID=45713
The second website I found gave a little more insight. It discussed how the officers spend a lot of their time doing paperwork. Most of the their work requires different jobs at the scene such as guiding traffic, and providing first aid. It suggested that officers in larger cities usually have specific roles when they arrive at the scene. Along those lines, some officers have special training in their department such as fingerprint identification, firearms training and chemical analysis. This website was a lot more helpful when learning about the career path of an officer
www.careerserachdatabse.com/police-detective-career.html

This essay should show your developing knowledge of your role in the mock crime/trial. You should discuss and describe what you are learning about your role. If you role has been engaged in the class project already, make sure to discuss your experience (without divulging case-sensitive information!

Although the crime has taken place the jury has not had anything to do and wont until the trial takes place. In reality a jury selection process would be starting to begin. They would call in 100 or more people to select from and slowly cut it down to just the few that actually make it into the courtroom as the jury.
Since we haven't discussed the Jury much in the classroom I am slowly learning things here and there. I began my role as a jury member thinking this job would be pretty simple, but the more I hear the more I realize the more difficult being a jury member will be. It is a lot simpler because this is not a real crime and no one is taking on an actual sentence, but I cant even imagine how hard it would be to sentence someone in reality.
I have found that a confession will most likely lead to a conviction even if it is false. It plays on the jury's mind and they are not able to overlook the confession even if there is hardly any evidence to convict them without it. Jurors get the idea that if they confessed then they did it, but many haven't learned about the pressures behind false confessions.
Tuesday in class I learned how the jury's verdict is very strict when it comes to a plea of innocent by reason of insanity. there a bunch of guidelines a jury must follow in making our verdict. If prosecution provides enough evidence to prove guilty beyond a reasonable doubt then the Jury will most likely say the defendant is guilty.
http://witnesslab.ua.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Titcomb_Semon_Brodsky.pdf

I have come to realize the importance of the jury. Before this class I didnt realize the impact they have on a trial and thought it was a simple task. They may be one of the most important aspects of a trial because they make the final decision. They say weather the defendant gets to walk or if they go to jail. The entire trial is attention goes to the jury and trying to make us believe that the defendant is innocent or guilty depending on which side your representing. All in all I have a whole new respect for jury members and all the crap the have to dig through to find, what they hope to be, the truth.

My role is a jury member in our mock trial. Due to the fact that we are just entering the crime, the jury has not played a role in the trial yet. We have not discussed my role in class much, but I have gained some new information through lectures, readings, and movies.

I have learned some information through our classroom discussions about the jury. For example, if the defendant confesses to committing the crime, the jury will most likely convict them. If does not matter if the jury is told that the confession was gained by an interrogation or if the judge tells the jury to ignore this fact when they are deliberating.

In my previous essay, I discussed the instructions that are given as to what the jury is to consider and what law applies to the case. In class we were told that this is a very long (and can be boring) process. The instructions can also be complicated and hard to understand. I have also learned that the judge may tell the jury that some information provided in the case is taken off the record, such as in the movie Primal Fear. Even though this is said, it does not change what the jury has heard and how it may affect their decisions.

Due to the lack of new information that I have (my role is being discussed after break), I chose to do some more research on the role of a jury member.During the trial the jurors are allowed to take notes. They may also pass notes to the foreman of the jury to ask the judge to explain certain aspects of the case. I learned that if the jury members cannot come to an agreement on the verdict, it is a hung jury and the judge cannot pronounce guilt on the accused. It is an offense for any person who is not a member of the jury to attempt to influence a juror. The juror is expected to be impartial and independent. At the end of the case an official has to keep the jury together until a verdict is reached. Jurors are taken into the jury room and are not allowed to have any contact with anyone outside the room. In regards to my discussion earlier about inadmissible evidence, it may still have great impact on the guilt or innocence of the defendant. Jurors need to decide the facts of the case. The jury does not have a role in sentencing; they are just in charge of deciding the guilty or not guilty verdict.

http://www.sundaylaw.net/books/other/standish/liberty/litb04.htm
http://www.courts.ie/courts.ie/library3.nsf/pagecurrent/DFA2D24C4A929DD880257044004FC053

For this mock trial, I am a member of the jury. Since our case hasn’t gone to trial yet, I have not played a role in the process. Eventually, I will listen to the defense attorney and prosecuting attorney and make a decision on whether or not I feel the victim is guilty or not. We haven’t discussed the jury much in class, but I have learned a few things from the textbook and from websites online.

Jurors are selected at random. It is mandatory that you report for jury duty, unless you have a legitimate excuse. You may be required to miss school or work in order to take part in the court proceedings. According to law, you cannot be fired or threatened to be fired by your employer for missing work due to jury duty. Jurors are selected from a master list. The list receives the names from registered voters and licensed drivers. A computer randomly selects the name.
After the jurors are selected, they are required to swear or to affirm, that they will "...try the matter in dispute and give a true verdict according to the evidence." When the jurors take this oath, they become the judge of all questions of fact and are duty bound to act fairly and impartially in considering the evidence presented.

I also researched how jurors should behave during the trial:
There are certain rules that all members of the jury must follow to ensure a fair trial. During the trial, jurors should not talk about the case with other jurors, or with other people, or allow people to talk about the case in their presence. If a person persists, a juror should report the incident to the judge or a court official. Jurors are given juror identification badges during their service so that no one mistakenly attempts to engage them in conversation regarding any case details.

Jurors should not talk about the trial with witnesses, lawyers, or anyone else related to the case during the trial because it could appear that something unfair is going on even though the discussion may have nothing to do with the trial. The judge may also instruct jurors not to listen to the radio, watch television reports, or read articles regarding the trial. Even if the judge does not specifically prohibit it, jurors should not read or listen to news reports about the trial during the trial.

Being summoned for jury service does not guarantee that an individual will actually serve on a jury. When a jury is needed for a trial, the group of qualified jurors is taken to the courtroom where the trial will take place. The judge and the attorneys then ask the potential jurors questions to determine their suitability to serve on the jury, a process called “voir dire”. The purpose of voir dire is to exclude from the jury people who may not be able to decide the case fairly. Members of the panel who know any person involved in the case, who have information about the case, or who may have strong prejudices about the people or issues involved in the case, typically will be excused by the judge. The attorneys also may exclude a certain number of jurors without giving a reason.

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/juror.html
http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/CourtroomEvents/JurorAppreciationAndLawDay/WhatYouNeedToKnowAboutJuryService.aspx

I am a member of the jury for the court case. We have not talked too much about the jury in class so far and we are not able to be a part of the process until it is time to hear the case the attorneys have put together. Juries have a very important role in the criminal process. They ultimately are the ones who decide whether the defendant is guilty or not. Every individual who has to go to trial has the right to a trail by jurors of their peers who are not biased against them. Every person that gets a letter for jury must go in and get questioned. The questions that are asked are meant to reveal the individual's tendency to favor the prosecution or defense. I found a website that talked about different kinds of questions that potential jurors are asked: affiliative questions and attitudinal questions. Affiliative questions are meant to discover the individual's membership in different social and cultural groups that influence their thinking to different social issues. Some typical questions that fall into this group are what is your age, occupation, education, political values, etc. These questions alone cannot rule out a jury member unless their answers give the impression that they have extreme values and thoughts about specific political values. The next type of questions asked to potential jurors are attitudinal questions. These questions are designed to identify the person's consciously held beliefs about social issues. Commonly, the questions asked are to investigate their ideas and beliefs about the criminal justice system and legal processes. There has been a big push to get away from using these questions and start using experiential questions. These ask about personal experiences that are similar or relevant to the case at hand.

Juries can last one-two days or several. It just depends on which court you are in and what the case is. I read on a website for the role essay that the court usually does not pay the individual or reimburse their travel. I read some of the other student's blogs and they have said that they do get paid. A different website said that the jury members will be paid $15.00 starting on the second day of the trial. Most employers will still pay their employees when they are summoned. We talked in class that the judge gives a very lengthy statement to the jury during the trial. He or she reads them the rules and laws that they are to follow when deliberating. This can last round half an hour. In court cases dealing with the insanity defense, it is very hard for the jury to find the defendant not guilty. The insanity defense is so hard to prove, so it mostly ends up failing. Jury decisions for most cases have to be unanimous. If even one person does not vote with the group, then they must proceed with their deliberation.

http://public.findlaw.com/abaflg/flg-15-3g-1.html
http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/jury-selection.html
http://www.co.grays-harbor.wa.us/info/judicial/jury_service.html

My role is being one of the detectives in this case. The role of the detective depends on what branch the detective is apart of whether is local, state, or federal. Detectives typically patrol their jurisdictions and investigate any suspicious activity. Their job also consists of writing reports and maintaining records of incidents they encounter. Detectives also quesiton witnesses and attempt to find suspects and hopefully find and capture the perpetrator.

When our dispatch recieved the call about the crime we rushed to the scene. We then reached the crime scene and the detectives(not including me) questioned the witnesses after the victim was pronounced dead. Since a police officer got to the scene first and already started questioning I decided to block off the crime scene. I then contained the media and taped off the door in order to prevent media from taking any pictures through the glass window. After making sure the media wouldn't become another problem I then started to help the crime scene investigators gather evidence. I don't want to give away valuable information to the media so I'm going to stop while I'm a head. After gathering all of the evidence we cleaned up the crime scene. Now that we have all the evidence we could gather it's time to start determining who the perpetrator is.

Here is a website that describes the job of a detectives and police officers.

http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos157.htm

My position in out classes mock trial is the role of the baliff, also known as marshalls or court officers. The case has not yet come to where I have had to come into the contact with the case. In the book "Careers in Criminal Justice and Related Fileds" by Harr and Hess (2010) they list baliffs duties as "Which vary by location, include enforcing courtroom rules, assisting judges, guarding juries from outside contact, delivering court documents and providing general security for courthouses".

The book also states that some positions are sworn police officers and deputies and some are nonsworn, unarmed personnel. Violence in the courtroom is greater then its ever been according to this book so being a sworn police officer or deputy would be a big advantage when it comes to protecting the people inside the courtroom. The pay for this position varies by what level you are in federal baliffs make the most money but even local baliffs can make close to thirty grand a year, which compared to some other some other more dangerous type of work sounds pretty good to me.

My role is a jury member in the mock trial that will be going on soon. We haven’t really touched basis with what all a juror does, but I see in the schedule we’ll be gaining more knowledge on everything a jury does during a court proceeding in the upcoming weeks. However, I have gained a few more interesting facts through the lectures discussed in class and online information.

In our class discussion we have mentioned how if the defendant confesses to a crime in which they admit they committed, the jury will be very likely to convict them. It wouldn’t matter whether the jury gets told by the judge to ignore that fact whether it be true or not, because now that information that was spoken out loud is engraved in the juries head for the rest of the court proceedings.

A few things I have learned about being a part of a jury is you are allowed to take detailed notes. I guess it never really registered through my head that this would be allowed, because in all the trials I’ve seen on TV or in real life, the main focus is usually on the defendant and what they did wrong, and there’s barely any attention on the jury until the verdict is needed. Personally though I think it would be pretty tricky for a juror to take complete detailed notes during a trial, because some trials can move along quickly, so I think maybe there should be a limit of how much you should really write down to help loosen up the speedy writing that a jury is trying to do. Another interesting fact I learned about as a juror you have an oath not to discuss what goes on in your trial with reasoning to the votes or statements, and this includes during and after the trail is over for 10 or so years. If you do end up spilling what went on, you could be held for contempt of the court, which is a very punishable offense, indeed. So basically the jury’s main role in these court proceedings is to sentence the convicted, whether they are guilty or not guilty, and that’s it. They can’t have any contact with others outside of the jury, especially when an official has to keeps the jury in a room, until they all can reach a verdict.

This site talks about note-taking during criminal trials.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1139806?uid=3739640&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=47698738190307

This site mentions how you aren’t allowed to talk with or discuss with anyone outside your jury about what’s going on in your trial.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/06/28/jury.stress.ptsd/index.html