Reality v. Fiction
In Reality
The real-life court system consists of the civil court, criminal court, and family court. The process by which legal decisions are made in these courts varies. In all court systems, a defendant has certain rights that cannot be violated. A defendant is to remain innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, be appointed an attorney, have the right to remain silent, be guaranteed due process, have the right to review all evidence, face the accusers, call witnesses on their behalf, and take the witness stand. A civil court requires that guilt be determined by a preponderance of the evidence submitted the likelihood of the respondents guilt is more likely than not as judged by a reasonable person. Civil cases are presented by a Plaintiff and defended by a Respondent. These cases are often small claims maters and tort law. Judicial verdicts, or decisions, are decided based on the choice made by the Respondent as to whether they prefer a jury trial or a bench trial. A jury is a group of court-chosen peers from within the community picked to hear a case and render a decision based on the facts and evidence submitted by the Plaintiff and the Respondent. A bench trial is a trial whereby the verdict is made solely by the presiding judge overseeing the case.
In a criminal court, a defendants guilt is determined not only by the evidence, but it is also based on the belief that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Criminal cases are presented to the court by the Prosecutor. A Prosecutor is an attorney who represents the state after deciding that criminal charges are necessitated against a defendant. The person accused of committing a crime against the state is called a defendant. Verdicts and decisions are rendered either via a jury or a judge, and the defendant must choose between a bench trial or jury trial. A defendant is also given the opportunity to proceed without legal counsel, hire their own attorney, or request to be represented by a court appointed attorney, also known as a public defender. The trial is where evidence is submitted by both the Prosecutor and the Defense for examination and deliberation. Plea bargains are used by the Prosecutor as a means of avoiding a long trial or in cases where the evidence is not very strong (Garner, 2001). A plea bargain is an offer made by the Prosecutor in exchange for a guilty plea. The plea bargain usually convicts the defendant of a lesser charge or a reduced or suspended sentence.
There are a few other pertinent positions and phases of the criminal court. A Grand Jury is used when a defendant has been charged with a felony. The Grand Jury hears the evidence and then decides if there is enough evidence against a defendant to issue an indictment (Garner, 2001). An arraignment is a pre-trial where the defendant appears in open court before the judge, is read the formal charges, and is asked to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. The Bail Hearing is included in the arraignment hearing, and the judge decides if the defendant should be afforded bail. In serious cases, the bail amount is either set very high or denied.
In a family court, issues are often based on the best interest of a child, if a child is involved otherwise, the decision is at the sole discretion of the presiding judge. Family courts use Plaintiffs and Respondents. If a social worker is involved, then the state will have a Prosecutor there to enforce the statutes and laws alleged to be violated in the case. A Guardian et Litem is the attorney appointed to protect the best interest of the child (Garner, 2001). Family courts provide representation by a public defender to the Respondent but only in cases involving possible incarceration or termination of parental rights.
In Fiction
Motion pictures made portraying a courtroom and its processes lead the public to believe that prosecutors and defense attorneys are all gifted with the ability to give elaborate speeches and drop questions without hesitation or delay. Court trials are short and every legal wrong is made right within a two-hour period (Morris, 2009). This is simply not true. In order to get a better understanding of how Hollywood downplays the legal system, it is important to look at an example. In this instance, the example is the motion picture, American Violet, produced by Bill Haney .
This motion picture is based on a true story that occurred in Hearne, Texas in Robertson County back in December 2000 (Morris, 2009). In the movie, the town was called Melody, Texas and the county was Harman. Dee Roberts, 23, , whose real name is Regina Kelley, was arrested during a Drug Task Force (DTF) sweep while she was at work. Roberts has four daughters. Her criminal record was one minor theft charge. She spent all night in jail without knowing what she was arrested or charged with. Roberts believed her charges were due to unpaid parking tickets (Haney Disney, 2008).
The following morning, Roberts appeared in court for arraignment. She was then informed that she was being charged with Distributing Narcotics in a school zone, a felony. Roberts plead not guilty and bail was set at 70,000. She was appointed a public defender named David Higgins. Higgins came to visit her in the company of Calvin Beckett, whose real name is John Paschall, the District Attorney (Morris, 2009). Beckett offered a plea bargain stating Roberts plead guilty and receive probation. Roberts refused because by pleading guilty, she would have a felony record, lose public aid, and be evicted from her subsidized apartment. Higgins urged her to take the plea and cited that if she fought and lost, then she would be facing 16-25 years in prison (Haney Disney, 2008). During Roberts second meeting with Higgins. Higgins urged again for her to accept the plea. He also played a tape of her making the drug deal. Texas allowed for the word of one informant to be sufficient evidence to secure an indictment against a defendant (Haney Disney, 2008).
After 21 days in jail, Roberts was released. Her pastor took it upon himself to address the legal problems and arranged for several friends to speak at a church meeting. Joe Fisher, David Cohen, and Byron Hill spoke at the meeting. Cohen and Hill were attorneys for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Cohen and Hill stated that DTF agencies were working in conjunction with District Attorneys offices to make numerous racially profiled arrests. They further stated that defendants were being forced into plea bargain agreements (Morris, 2009). Cohen and Hill informed Roberts that she had a civil case against the DTF, the police department, Beckett, and Robertson County. She agreed to allow them to represent her in the civil matter. Sam Conroy, a local attorney, was brought in on the case. Roberts lost her job because her boss feared retaliation from Beckett. Shortly after the civil lawsuit was filed, she was hired to work at another restaurant. Beckett came into her place of work, spoke a few words to her boss, and after Beckett left, Roberts was fired.
During the preparation phase before the criminal and civil trials, Roberts was arrested again. Roberts had sole custody of the children, and her ex-husband came to her mothers home and took the children. Roberts went to her exs home and demanded her children. Her civil case attorneys arranged a meeting with Higgins. They asked to listen to the tape and view the arrest warrant for Roberts, but Higgins said he lost them. Conroy informed Higgins that what he was doing was obstruction of justice.
In February 2001, the criminal charges against Roberts were dismissed. The civil case was running into problems. The judge refused to grant a change of venue. When Roberts appeared in family court, her ex-husband attempted to regain custody of her children. Beckett was the presiding hearings officer over the matter. He ruled in Roberts favor, but in reality, he should have recused himself from the case. Depositions in the civil matter commenced during this time. The police informant was subpoenaed as well as Roberts, other DTF officers, and Beckett. Becket lost his temper during the deposition and verbally abused the African-American attorney from the ACLU. It had been discovered that Beckett commonly used racial epithets when referring to defendants and other people of color. In April 2002, the Federal District Court ruled in Roberts favor, and she won the civil case.
The courtroom movie and the courtroom in reality are the same in that they use the same positions such as judge, defendant, prosecutor, and other positions. The two courtrooms are different in that people in real life do not speak as elaborately, the trials last longer, and courtrooms are far more informal. This motion picture was interesting and entertaining, but it glossed over many legal perspectives with relevance to the courtroom. The movie portrayed the court system in Texas to function with a good-ole-boy mentality. Fortunately, the courtroom portrayal was very accurate and to the point. The case was exciting and educated the viewer on various aspects of the law with regard to discrimination and racial profiling. There are similarities in the real-life courtroom when compared to the courtroom in the movie, but there are so many differences. Courtroom dramas are entertaining, but they should not be relied upon for actual facts pertaining to the law.
Categories:
0 comments:
Post a Comment