|
The trial of both civil and criminal cases are conducted under similar rules of
procedures and in much the same manner The stages of trial usually include:
(1). Opening Statements
An opening
statement is made, first by the attorney for the plaintiff, then by the
attorney for the defendant. The purpose of this opening statement is to
outline to the jury the facts of the case and what each side will attempt
to establish through the presentation of evidence. This is only an explanation
of what each side claims. Sometimes the judge will make a preliminary
charge which substitutes for opening statements.
(2). Presentation of Evidence
After both
sides have been given the opportunity to make opening statements or the
judge has made a preliminary charge, the trial moves to the stage in which
evidence is presented by each side. The plaintiff first presents all the
evidence which supports his contentions, and is then followed by the defendant
who presents his evidence. The plaintiff may then give evidence to disprove
or explain some evidence presented by the defendant. Evidence may be in
the form of a written document, an object, a photograph, or an x-ray.
Such pieces of evidence are called exhibits. This physical evidence will
be taken with you to the jury room, and may be considered in your deliberation.
Most evidence
is presented in the form of spoken testimony of witnesses who have taken
an oath to tell the truth. The attorney who has called the witness first
asks questions of that witness, called direct examination. After direct
examination is concluded, the lawyer for the other party may cross-examine,
or ask further questions of that witness. After cross-examination, the
lawyer who called the witness has a final opportunity to ask questions
which is called redirect examination.
You should
pay close attention to each witness as he testifies, not only to what
he says but his manner and actions. If at any time you are unable to hear
clearly, make the judge aware of the problem by raising a hand.
In some instances,
the testimony of a witness who cannot be present at the trial may have
been taken before the trial and written down. Such testimony, called a
deposition, was given under oath, and if read into evidence, should be
treated as though the witness was testifying in court. All testimony as
well as remarks of the judge, attorneys, and other court officials are
recorded by the court reporter. This constitutes the official record of
the trial which may be of importance in later proceedings.
From time
to time during the trial, you may hear the attorneys make what are known
as "objections". Objections may be made for several reasons,
including objections to the conduct of the parties or their attorneys,
to the form of a question during the examination of a witness, or to the
introduction of evidence. If the objection is deemed improper or not well-founded
by the judge, he will "overrule" it, and allow the proceedings
to continue or the evidence to be introduced. If on the other hand the
judge finds the objection to be valid and proper he may "sustain"
it, thereby discontinuing that conduct or question or may refuse to allow
the introduction of evidence.
Under the
rules of law governing the introduction and admission of evidence, a lawyer
is within his rights to object to the introduction of any evidence which
he believes is not proper. The judge is the sole authority on what evidence
is proper. Since the evidence may be excluded, the jury is usually not
allowed to hear arguments as to admissibility. Thus, the judge may send
the jury out of the courtroom to allow the attorneys to argue to him whether
the evidence should be admitted. Sometimes evidence gets before the jury
before the attorney has a chance to object. The judge may order the jury
to disregard such evidence completely and if so ordered, it should be
disregarded and not considered as evidence.
(3). Final or Closing Arguments
After both
sides have had an opportunity to present their evidence and have both
"rested" their cases, they are given a chance to make final
or closing arguments to the jury. First, the plaintiff's attorney, or
the prosecutor in a criminal case followed by the defendant's attorney
make closing arguments in which they sum up the evidence and testimony
and try to persuade the jury to find in favor of their respective clients.
These arguments, like the opening statements should be listened to attentively
but should not be considered as evidence in themselves.
(4). Instructions
At the end
of the final arguments by the lawyers, the judge will instruct you on
the law that applies to the case, and you must apply that law to the facts
as you find them in arriving at your verdict. You are bound under your
oath to give full effect to the law as the judge states it to you. You
must pay close attention to his instructions.
If the judge
should give you any instruction that is different from any statement in
this pamphlet, you should accept his instruction as correct and be guided
by it.
(5). Jury Deliberation
Following
the instructions, or charge by the judge, the bailiff will escort the
jury to the jury room where you will conduct your deliberations. The foreman
designated by the judge presides during the deliberations. The foreman
acts as the chairman of the jury. It is his duty to see that discussion
is carried on in a free and orderly manner, that the matters and issues
submitted for your decision are fully and freely discussed, and that every
juror is given an opportunity to express himself.
After you
retire to the jury room, you are entitled to have all exhibits brought
to you. Should you feel that it is necessary to be re-instructed, or receive
additional instruction on the law or to have certain testimony read to
you, you may so inform the judge through the bailiff. You should not,
however, make such requests lightly, for they can be answered only by
returning the jury to the courtroom where the Court will resume in full
session. The procedure may require considerable time, but is justifiable
if you seriously believe it to be necessary or helpful to you in discharging
your duty.
In weighing
evidence, an important distinction exists between civil and criminal cases
in the degree of proof required to sustain an allegation. In a criminal
case, the defendant, to be convicted, must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt. In a civil case, the party who has made an affirmative allegation
against another must prove that allegation by a preponderance of the evidence
to support a finding in his favor on that allegation. In each case, the
judge will carefully explain to you the degree of proof required to support
particular findings, and you should pay the same careful attention to
his instructions on this subject as you are required to pay to all other
instructions.
Quite often
in the jury room differences of opinion arise among the jurors. When this
occurs, each juror should express his opinions and reasons therefor. By
the process of careful and thorough reasoning, it is generally possible
for jurors to reach a verdict. A juror should not hesitate to change his
mind where there is good reason for doing so, but one who has a definite
opinion on a question should not change that opinion unless he conscientiously
is moved to do so as a result of the deliberations, his consideration
of the views of his colleagues, and his own further thought on the matter.
It would be wrong for a juror to refuse to listen to the arguments and
opinions of the others, or to deny the right of another juror to express
his own opinions. All jurors should deliberate and vote on each issue
to be decided. A juror should never vote against his conscience or his
own judgment. He should vote only according to his own honest convictions,
arrived at after a full and free discussion with his fellow jurors. After
a verdict, or after a mistrial, or disagreement, jurors are under no duty
or obligation to discuss what took place in the jury room with the lawyers
in the case or anyone else.
|