Title
Grading
Other than whether you have followed the instructions and guidelines on this assignment, your grade will be based on how complete and thorough your answers are, how much depth you go into, and the sophistication of your analyses, especially in the long answer questions. If you skim over details or do not have enough information to answer all the questions completely, there will be an effect on your grade. You must answer each question that appears below.
Instructions
This assignment is not an essay. You must number each response individually omitting the questions. Your submission must be in 12-point font, double-spaced, with 1 margins.
Your short answer responses should be 1-2 paragraphs for each question. Your long answer responses should be about 1 page for each question.
Be selective: although you must answer each of the questions below, you will likely have to make choices about what information that you viewed is important and what is not. Be sure to allow yourself enough space to include general comments about how what you witnessed relates to how the legal system works and any preconceptions you may have had.
Be sure that you do not copy-and-paste the questions or any portion of this assignment into your submission as specified above. Copying and pasting the questions will result in a high Vericite unoriginality score, and your submission will be subject to a deduction in points or rejected.
Assignment Questions Short Answer Questions (1-2 paragraphs each):
1. List the name and location of the court and the date and time of the proceedings you witnessed. Identify the name of the judge.
2. Describe the overall demeanor and conduct of all parties, including, but not necessarily limited to: the judge, the defense attorney(s), the prosecutor(s), court staff (bailiff, police officer(s), clerk(s), transcriptionist(s)), audience members, jurors, if applicable, etc.)
3. Discuss your observations regarding the professionalism and /or competency of each of the proceedings and the personnel involved.
4. Note the race, gender, age, apparent socio-economic backgrounds of (1) all court personnel and attorneys (2) all litigants/parties and (3) audience members (guesstimates are fine). Indicate whether you believe this information is important and why/why not.
5. As best you can, identify the specific charge(s) and outcomes/results involved in the case(s) you observed (do not spend too much time on this question, select only 3-4 of the outstanding cases and then move on to the next question).
Long Answer Questions (~1 page each):
6. Discuss the overall efficiency, or lack thereof, of the court proceedings and the overall experience. How does this compare to any previous conceptions you may have had?
7. Describe the overall mood and ambience of the court. How did you experience compare to media representations?
8. Develop your subjective, personal impressions of what you have witnessed and reflect upon the experience.
9. Discuss your experience with one or two peers from class. How did your experiences compare?
10. Share how what you have witnessed illustrates lessons you have learned about how the legal system operates. Develop your response to this question in some depth. Short Answer Question
1.
On January 28, 2020, at approximately 8:30 am, I visited the Bellevue Courthouse located at 1309 114th Ave SE # 100 Bellevue, WA 98004. The court sessions began in the BE-2 court room at 8:45 am preceded by the Judge Pro Tem Sue Noonan.
2.
The behavior, in general, was very civilized. The lawyers of both parties and the court clerks were cordial with the people who were present. When the judge arrives in the courtroom everything flows according to the plan, everyone knows what they have to do. Also, the audience members were waiting patiently for their turn.
3.
I have to say that the level of professionalism in court was what I expected only up to some point. The lawyers were prepared for each case, the judge listened to their requests and decided based on their request. The court clerk made sure that each person signs their
4.
Judge: American/ Women/ late 60s
Clerk #1: American /Women/ late 50s
Clerk #2: American/ Women/ early 50s
Defense attorney #1: American / Women/ early 60s
Defense attorney #2: American / Male/ Mid 40s
Prosecutor: American / Women/ late 30s
Prosecutor assistant: American / Male/ early 40s
Audience member #1: Hispanic/ Women/ early 30s
Audience member #2: Hispanic/ Male/ late 50s (Translator)
Audience member #3: American/Male/ late 60s
Audience member #4: American/ Women/ late 60s
Audience member #5: American/ Male/ early 30s
Audience member #6: American/ Male/ mid 30s
Audience member #7: American/ Male/ early 30s
Audience member #8: American/ Male/ early 40s
Audience member #9: American/ Women/ late 30s
Audience member #10: Russian/ Male/ late 50s
Audience member #11: Russian/ Women/ mid 50s
Audience member #12: Russian/ Women/ mid 60s (Translator)
Audience member #13: American/ Male/ early 20s
Audience member #14: American /Male/ 19 years
Audience member #15: American/ Male/ late 40s
Audience member #16: American/ Women/ mid 40s
Audience member #17: Russian /Women/ late 40s
Audience member #18: Dominican /Women/ late 30s (myself)
5.
There were 11 cases in the courtroom at the time I was present, of all of them, two weren’t about drugs. The first one is about parents that made the charge to his son because of domestic violence, it seems that after one breakdown their son became violent and they had to put a court restriction. They claim that their son got better, finished school, and his parents want to give him another chance. They want to build the relationship again, step by step. The judge ruled in favor of their parent and which they luck in this new chapter. The second one is a man who wants the court to permit him to see his daughter with supervision. He physically mistreated his partner while she was pregnant, and the court issued a restraining order. He has more cases of domestic violence and that didn’t change. The only thing that changed is that the judge decided that he could have contact with his daughter only if there was a third person present. The last case the defendant came without a lawyer when the judge revised his document advise him to bring a lawyer the next time. She said he has serious charges and if he doesn’t find the help he will end up in jail. She didn’t mention all the details. All of the other cases most of them were about drugs.
6.
I must say that this is the first time that I’m in a courtroom. I was surprised about how fast everything went through. The judge went from one case to the other without stopping. She heard what the defendant lawyer and prosecutor have to say, and also gave the chance to the defendant to say anything he/she wants to say or clarified. After the judge said her decision, she makes sure that the defendant understands what she said then the defendant sign the paper, at the same time that is happening the prosecutor starts talking about the next case. I have to admit that this proceeding surprised me. I believed that the document was given in different places in the same building. It seems a very efficient method but for me was quite confusing.
The lawyers talk very fast and the only time that I had a clear knowledge of what was happening is when the defendant has a translator, in this case, the lawyer had to speak slower so they have time to translate what they were talking.
7.Describe the overall mood and ambience of the court. How did you experience compare to media representations?
8. Develop your subjective, personal impressions of what you have witnessed and reflect upon the experience.
9. Discuss your experience with one or two peers from class. How did your experiences compare?
10. Share how what you have witnessed illustrates lessons you have learned about how the legal system operates. Develop your response to this question in some depth. After attending the session, I discussed my experience with colleagues who had attended different courts from the one that I had attended. In my own case, the general experience was that attending court sessions was of great influence in developing my understanding of classwork. Further, I developed an understanding that courts exist to serve justice and they are diligently delivering on that front. One of my colleagues agreed with my experience adding that court sessions had given meaning to the theory we learn in class and developed on how the court works to achieve efficiency. This was not the case with the other colleague as his experience was that the courts were biased, applied the law to suit individual interests and did not deliver justice. His experience was as a result of the feeling he developed that factors such as race and gender had influenced the rulings made. He was therefore discouraged and saw a huge difference between what was learned in class and what was experienced during court sessions. Despite the differences, I strongly believe his experience was just one of the very few that give a negative image to the courts. In general, courts exist to ensure justice is served by sentencing the offenders.
