Each student will be required to comment on two of their discussion responses
Student 1
The dual court system of the United States was originally structured to determine the truth and provide the suspect of a crime a fair and impartial trial. It is easy to argue the U.S Court System does not actually determine the truth, as the determination of guilt is based off of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt is defined as the "solid doubt about the actual guilt of a defendant that arises or remains after careful and impartial examination of all evidence" (Merriam-Webster, 2015, para.1). The definition mentioned above, allows for the jury to make a determination of guilt with or without the actual truth ever being determined.
The U.S. Court System is also facing negative perception due to the increasing impression the truth in court is being compromised by plea bargaining, jury nullification or acquitting a defendant due to the jury disagreeing with law or evidence, improper or racist police procedures and a circus atmosphere brought by high profile cases (Peak, 2012). These factors could and have led to unethical behavior by law enforcement, court members and jurors ultimately leading to the wrongful conviction of an innocent suspect.
An example of the U.S Court system failing to find the truth is the wrongful conviction of Daniel Andersen; who spent 27 years incarcerated for the alleged attempted rape and murder of his childhood friend. Andersen, who was 19 years old at the time, was originally found guilty due to circumstantial evidence and a confession obtained after 16 hours of interrogation while Andersen was extremely intoxicated. Consequently, DNA evidence eventually proved Andersen's innocence; however, Andersen was still the victim of a biased court system and lost 27 years of his life (Bluhm legal clinic, 2015).
The U.S Court System does have several safeguards in place which attempt to reach the truth and mitigate wrongful convictions. These safeguards are the cross-examination of witnesses; power in the courtroom is spread across several different people with each having limited powers to counteract the others. The reading described how the jury has the power to disregard the judge if they view him or her as being unfair and biased to reach a fair verdict. Likewise, the judge has the power to counteract the Jury's findings and order a new trial (Peak, 2012).
As with any process or system in the Federal, State and Local Governments; decisions are often made for political advantage, from corruption and a fear of negative media or political attention. These systems, especially the U.S Court System were established to determine the truth; however, political and unethical behavior have tainted these systems and to often are criminals released and innocent suspects convicted even with these safeguards in place. Yes, the truth is often determined and the proper finding of guilt is often made but too often, bias and unethical behavior influence the U.S. Court System.
Student 2
Is the current U.S. Court System structured to determine the truth?
As we all know or what we were taught to know is that the U.S. Court System is structured to determine the truth. But does the truth always come out in the court of law? In my opinion, it is never easy to determine the truth rather in the court of law or outside of the courts. Some people are not willing to always tell the truth, no matter what. Often times, people who enter court have little regard for guilt or innocence, but instead focuses on the prosecutors being able to prove a defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. (Peak, 2012) The truth can always be twisted to make a person appear innocent, no matter what the actual truth is. A lot of what we see on television these days depicts the courtroom as a sports arena where someone is declared a winner and someone is declared a loser. In my opinion, the U.S. Court System, is a sports arena, lawyers battle each other in the court of law to determine who's better. This overshadows the true reason why the court system was created; the court systems were created to determine the truth. (Peak, 2012) Have you ever seen the television show "Suits"? In this television show, lawyers often battle each other in the court of law to determine superiority, often making cases personal rather than business-like. Overall, even though the U.S. Court System was established to determine the truth, the truth does not always prevail.
Are there safeguards to enable the system to reach the truth?
Of course there are safeguards in place to enable the U.S. Court System to reach the truth! The true question is, do the safeguards that have been put in place actually work? The biggest safeguard that has been implemented are the rights that each and every person in the U.S. has, the U.S. Constitution. The Sixth Amendment protects us from unfair prosecutions. Cross examination has also been put in place as a safeguard to reach the truth. Cross-examination is the examination of someone who has already testified under oath to determine if the persons' statements are credible or not. (Merriam-Webster's online dictionary, n.d.) Another safeguard are the actual people that take part in the actual trial, including the judge and the people of the jury. The jury should be impartial, insuring that at the end of a trial, the verdict that is reached is fair and just. On the other hand, the judge that oversees the trial is also a safeguard and has the right do dismiss a case if he determines something is not fair in the trial.