Generally, the jury's discussion is private, and no one but the jury is involved (or present). That being said, I'm aware of cases when the jury called for one (or both) of the attorneys to ask questions, but even then, the attorneys answered the questions and left the room.
The prosecutor is a legal official responsible for presenting the case against the defendant in a criminal trial, aiming to prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The jury is a group of individuals selected to hear the evidence presented by the prosecutor and defense attorney and ultimately determine the defendant's guilt or innocence based on that evidence. The prosecutor represents the state or government, while the jury represents the community in deciding the outcome of a trial.
Before a trial, the prosecutor and defense attorney select a jury through a process called voir dire. During this process, potential jurors are questioned to assess their suitability for the case, ensuring they can remain impartial. Both sides can challenge or dismiss certain jurors, ultimately agreeing on a final panel that will hear the case. The selected jurors are tasked with evaluating the evidence and rendering a verdict.
The first person to hear Paul's defense in Caesarea was Felix, who was the Roman governor of Judea at the time.
If you tell her the things she wants to hear. Girls like to hear the truth.
Not necessarily.The defense attorney's responsibilities do not require objectivity. Of course, if the defense attorney can objectively prove that the defendant is innocent, it helps, but most defense attorneys are well-aware of their client's guilt. Their responsibility is to get the defendant the best deal possible, which many times requires them to appeal to the emotions of the judge, prosecutor, and jury.The prosecutor should be a little more objective. The prosecutor is expected to provide tangible evidence that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; however, the prosecutor, too, may appeal to the emotions of the jury. You'll commonly hear prosecutors make remarks about the victim's personal life, representing them as an upstanding person, thus making the jury more likely to convict and the judge more likely to sentence strictly.Both should show SOME objectivity; however, if they're acting "emotion-less", they would not be adequately doing their jobs.Emotion-less objectivity is better suited for an investigator.
They do not wish the soldiers to hear their discourse.
The COURT doesn't decide to hear a case based on evidence, the evidence only needs to convince the Prosecutor that a crime occurred, then HE brings the case to court for prosecution.
Yes, it will if it has original jurisdiction to hear tort cases. Charitable immunity is a common affirmative defense raised by charitable organizations when a person injured while receiving the benefits provided by that organization sues them for damages. If the court can hear the plaintiff's tort case, it can entertain an affirmative defense to it. It also goes without saying (although I am saying it here) that any appellate court having appellate jurisdiction over that trial court can hear an appeal of the disposition of the charitable immunity defense.
Knock knock, who's there? Ach. Ach Who? Bless you
I wanted to spark a discussion and hear your thoughts on unique uses for our beloved umbrellas. We all know their primary purpose, but have you ever explored alternative ways to utilize them? Let's get creative together!
Panel discussion
There are several courts to which an appeal may be made, depending on the circumstances. The following site contains a discussion: