CJ506 Unit 2 Assignment

CJ506 Unit 2 Assignment

Introduction

Different systems are implemented in different countries of the world to maintain law and order. These systems are there to enforce law by a systematic method; by organizing ways of discovering and punishing people of the society who don't abide by the rules. The following paper discusses a few aspects of an Adversarial System.

Discussion

Purpose of an Adversarial System

Adversarial system is one of the legal systems put into practice for seeking justice and truth. The system is based on the hypothesis that when two parties are allowed to argue the controversy, with aid of advocates, truth and justice can prevail. The two parties are represented by their respective advocates who present their side of the incident in front of a judge or jury and then the decision is taken by these authorities. A judge or jury sometimes also work for the task of investigating the truth, that system is known as inquisitorial system. Likewise various systems exist to implement laws in countries (www.dubberkelman.com). The purpose of an adversarial system is just the same. An impartial person judges the incident presented to him by two advocates who argue the truth in an open court. In common law countries this system is usually implemented with a few exceptions of slight violations. In US for instance, the adversarial system is commonly adopted with the exception to minor noncompliance such as traffic laws.

Standards of proof for reasonable doubt and preponderance of the evidence

The adversarial system is one of the most adopted due to the fact that it allows both the defence and prosecution to testify to a jury or judge. The final verdict on the case is given by the judge. The system is known to be an easier and effective method of resolving law disputes. If the jurors have no doubt of the defendant's guilt and there is no reasonable point left to argue that points to any doubt then the jurors pronounce the defendant as guilty of the crime. The system is known to be an easier and effective method of resolving law disputes. If the jurors have no doubt of the defendant's guilt and there is no reasonable point left to argue that points to any doubt then the jurors pronounce the defendant as guilty of the crime. But there are situations when reasonable doubts are present which lead to uncertainty. In such situations some standards have to be set in order to conclude what's right. In criminal prosecution, reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof used by courts. The main reason of using this is that the verdict of trial gets some credibility (www.lawcom.govt.nz). In situations that involve death penalties and deprivation of liberty of defendant, verdict has to be taken without doubts. Proof by preponderance of evidence is a lower burden of proof. Whenever there arises a situation in which one side has more evidence then the other side, and the case is going in favor of the other side on the basis of ...