Law – The crown court

1. Was the atmosphere in the court friendly, neutral or intimidating and, what factors led to you to your conclusion? I found the atmosphere in the court to be very intimidating; it was not friendly at all. It was quite formal. The silence sometimes made the atmosphere quite tense at times. The seating arrangements made it very intimidating as well because you were in full view of everyone else. At times it was very boring and many people fell as sleep especially in the jury. 2. What were your impressions of the following: Court layout

The court layout was good because no matter where you was seated you still had a good view of the surroundings. Sitting from the public gallery I was able to see the judge, the clerk of the court, the jury, the defendant and the solicitors. The courtroom is laid out in a way that you will be able to identify everyone no matter what position you were seated. The judge was in the centre and maintained a focus point. Judge The judge holds authority in the court The judge informed the court of the case and also informed the jury of what they should be looking for. He also outlined what criminal law was involved in the case.

Jury The jury remained silent throughout the whole time and were just viewing the evidence and listening to everything that was being said in the courtroom. Counsel The counsel were always discussing things between themselves regarding the case Solicitors The solicitors tried their best to represent their client. Defendant The defendant remained calm throughout. He tried to remain relaxed. He became quite agitated when the prosecution were asking him certain questions and he tried to put himself across as an honest person 3. The case The defendant is accused of using fraudulent documents to obtain a vehicle.

The defendant's solicitor claimed that even though he used false documents he was willing to pay for the vehicle. The prosecution claimed that he would not have paid for the vehicle and that he had no means to support this. The defendant was not working at the time he purchased the vehicle. He also placed a deposit of i?? 4,000 for the vehicle. The defendant admitted to using false documents but said he was going to pay for it. This made the prosecution's job more easier as the defendant has already admitted to this offence. The prosecution proved beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant was guilty

It didn't take long for the jury to decide that the defendant was guilty of using fraudulent documents to obtain a vehicle. There was also a written statement from a potential employer of the defendant. The employer claimed that the defendant was going to work for him for a short period. This statement was 4. What statute law and/or common law were central to the case? Criminal law is central to this case because it is a wrong against society and therefore is a crime. 5. Performance of Witnesses The prosecution called their first witness who was a man from the accounts department at Saab where the defendant purchased the vehicle.

He claimed that the defendants documents where passed to him after the vehicle had been purchased and when he went through them again he realised that some of the documents were false including a drivers license. He informed the car sales men of this and defendant was asked to bring the car back to the showroom for a check-up. The defendant brought the car back to the showroom assuming that the car might need a repair of some sort Saab was criticised for not checking the information given to them by the defendant thoroughly before selling the vehicle by the judge. The second witness was a police officer who interrogated the defendant.

He answered every question The third witness did not attend court but a written statement was read out instead. He was the defendant's soon to be employer. The evidence he gave in his statement was weak and did not contribute much in favour of the defendant. Conclusion The James Bulger case I think is a good example of injustice. The two young boys who murdered two-year-old James Bulger have now been released after spending only 9 years in custody. The Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf effectively ended their tariff, the minimum period they must spend in custody, last October.

Their identities will be changed to protect themselves and start a new life. I don't think that they have served their time for murdering the little boy. I think they should have been sent to a young offenders institution to serve the rest of the time. There should be a Law that allows criminals to serve their full sentence especially when its murder. I think attending the courts will help you to understand the Law better. I learnt about this case by attending jury service. It has given me some insight into how the British judicial system works.