Law

The two questions this paper will answer are question two and three.

Q.1. In what ways does the cooperation of other members of the courtroom work group work to your benefit How would answer be different if you approached the question from the vantage point of the judge or the defense attorney

Cooperation of other members of the court room work group work to the benefit of all inside the courtroom through the organized flow of communication and activities. This alone helps eliminate the tendency of the participant to become bored inside the court house. But more importantly, their cooperation helps to facilitate the progress of the court activity. In fact, as Cole and Smith noted, decisions in criminal cases rely on how the participants interact with each other. According to the paper titled The Dynamics of Courthouse Justice this courtroom work group represent a complex network of ongoing social relationships as these courtroom participants are representative of separate independent sponsoring institutions.

In view of the fact that everybody in the courtroom including visitors and friends of the contending parties, are interested in the outcome of the case, everybody benefits from the cooperation of the courtroom work group as everyone play an important roles that contributes to the easy and fast flow of the courtroom activity that results to speedy administration of justice.    

If the question is approached on vantage point of the defense attorney, cooperation will work for the benefit of defendant only when the cooperation of every participant is helping strengthen the defendants position. The situation is always a court battle. That is, as the paper stated, Some defense attorney engage in hostile relations with prosecutors and exhibits attributes of adversarial behavior.  The reason for such behavior can be easily identified especially when the conduct of the prosecutors are hostile to the dependants. That is, the prosecutor hires an expert witness to testify to advance the cause of the party that hired them by behaving in an unethical manner (Peer Review of Expert Testimony Resource Document). However, when the prosecutors are fair and objective, cooperation of courtroom work group creates a good climate for the defense lawyer to build his defense on the case.

Q.2. Of the several consequences of delay, which one do you think is the most important Which one is least important

While it is true that delays in the administration of justice have a lot of consequences, the most important consequence of delay however is the potential deterioration of evidence due to time lapse. This would deprive citizen of a basic right of justice and it will be a mockery of the judicial system because the Constitution declares that every individual is entitled of a speedy delivery of justice. Statically, the length of time from filing to verdict in state automobile jury was 19.2 months. Thus, when a case is more twenty-four months, it may be delayed already due to the statistical findings of 19.2 months from filing and up to the verdict on case. The most important consequence therefore, is when due to the lapse the evidence were lost, or had deteriorated.

Which one is the least important
There are several consequences that the paper had raised regarding delay in the administration of justice. The least one obviously, is the postponement of weak case the prosecutors are likely to lose. This consequence is least because it was based on a narrow and desperate motive. Prosecutor should be objective enough to accept defeat for the sake of the innocent person standing on trial on charges of violation of the law. It is indeed a cheap strategy which only lengthens the anguish of the innocent man on trial. Delaying the administration of justice will only lead to the deterioration of evidence which can lead to the deterioration of the case.  The consequence of justice delay therefore is justice denied.