Cour Case Essay
Project description
RESEARCH PROJECT (20 points):
There are two options for completing the research project:
1)Each student shall visit a courthouse for either the morning session (0830-1200 hrs.) or the
afternoon session (1330-1700 hrs.). ( please do court house )
OR
2)Each student shall participate in a police ride-along of at least four hours in duration.
The student will be required to submit a written description of his/her observations and analyze this experience sociologically. The report shall be at least four pages in length and double-spaced. Emphasis shall be placed on the analysis rather than a detailed description of the events observed. Citing sociological theorists and concepts from the text, the student shall demonstrate the ability to apply theory to real-life phenomena.
The students grade for the research project will be based on writing competence as well as social science reasoning and analysis. Essentially, the student must be able to make observations, apply relevant sociological concepts, and discuss these relationships. Citations are required.
Here is a sample of this Court Case Essay
Low C Paper. No citations (where did one shotters come from?); paper is almost entirely description; minimal reference to concepts/theory; minimal application and analysis; very basic connection between what was observed and the sociological concepts learned in class and through the text; shows basic understanding of material learned in course.
People vs. Pisarick
Personally, I would have liked to go on the police ride-along and attend a court case, but the ride-along had a month long waiting list. I decided to go to the Superior Court House because it included all of Orange County and would have tons of cases to hear. At first I thought I was going to be there all day, but eventually I found two trials that seemed worth writing about. The first case involved a dispute between two organizations and the second was a down and dirty homicide.
The first case was Prestige vs. Air and was being judged by Geoffrey Glass. This specific trial was a negotiation and had no jury. A negotiation is when two parties solve their dispute without the help of a third party. Negotiations must have two parties that seek to resolve their problem by coming to a settlement. Also for negotiations both sides should have debating, as well as bargaining. I did not spend much time on this case because it was pretty much over when I got there. But I thought it was interesting to see another side to the court system.
Of course the most interesting case that I saw was the 187 penal code homicide. Even though I only sat in on two hours of the whole case, I think that this case would be long and have many litigants. Litigants are defined as all the players in the court. This type of case would involve one-shotters vs. one-shotters. One-shotters usually include individuals, whereas repeat players are usually organizations. This case was entitled the People vs. Pisarcik and was being judged by Frank F. Fasal.
Even before entering the courtroom, it is known that this type of case is described as public law. Public law in this trial is defined as a relationship between individuals and the state. Public law can also involve the government and the duties and powers of police officials. This type of case can also be defined as criminal law because a crime took place and there will be a prosecution of the offender. Criminal law is described as a crime against the people or the state. Most of the time criminal cases will result in the punishment of the offender, but compensatory or restitutive as well.
This case was not only trying a murder, but a sexual orientation crime as well. The man that was killed was a homosexual and that might have been the reason why the offender murdered him. The man under investigation was Greg Pisarcik and it was noticeable that he was wearing nice clothes and looked well groomed. I would guess that family or friends paid his bail because I do not think you could look good coming out of prison. After Greg Pisarcik entered the courtroom, the jury did as well. All the jurors were white women, probably moms in their mid 30s to 40s, with the exception of one white male. This jury was most definitetly handled by professionals and was picked systematically. Many lawyers now use social scientists to pick jurors and it is believed that it will decide the outcome of the case. If a lawyer believes that he has picked the best jury, than he/she has already won. Social scientists must first find out the most favorable juror and this is done through a series of polls and questionnaires. Lawyers must then choose jurors that fit those specific characteristics.
On this particular day the defense would be presenting their evidence to the jury. The only testimony I saw, but which lasted two and a half hours, was Gregs sister Kimberly. Gregs lawyer asked Kimberly to describe to the jury what it was like growing up with their family. She answered that it could only be described as chaotic because her father was an abusive alcoholic. She said that she had grown up in New Jersey and would come home every night to torture and abuse. She had also grown up with three older brothers, Greg, Charlie, who was in prison, and another who does not associate with the family anymore. Her fathers anger was directed more to his sons than his daughter, and he would persecute them endlessly. He would start fights with his sons, and then when his sons naturally backed down, he would choke them until almost death. His father also liked to ritually line his sons up and describe to them how he felt about them. He would call them worthless, useless fagots, and then proceed to spit on them. Her father was also a very outspoken racist and homophobic. Her father would insist that affirmative action laws were taking his jobs. Kim was abused as well, even more when she started to fight back. Also her mother was abused and never stood up for the children or tried to get help.
As a result of these unfortunate events, all the children have psychological problems and had to be enrolled into special education. When Kim was ten years old, both her brothers, Greg and Charlie, molested her. Kim states that this only happened twice and then they stopped. Later on in life all of the children would resort to drug usage to try to numb their pain. Kim stated that she would dread having to come home and would often stay at friends houses. Kim also described how the outside family ties knew nothing about their fathers abuse, since he would put on a different face whenever they were around. Kim, as well as her brothers, were afraid of what might happen if they told anyone what was really going on.
At this point the prosecution took over and asked Kim to describe Gregs style. Kim said that Greg has always taken pride in what he wears and always tries to look his best. Kim stated that Greg was also very well liked in school and considered quite popular. He had many friends and even more girlfriends. The prosecution tried to get Kim to tell the jury that her brother told her that he hated his dad, but she insists that they all hated him, so it was never talked about. The prosecution then brought out some evidence in the forms of letters and photographs. The prosecution described that on one occasion Kim gave her father a surprise birthday party, with the help of Greg. At this statement, one of the jurors looked very surprised. He then introduced a letter written by Kim to Greg, saying that their father was not that bad and abusive and could often be quite loving. This evidence that the prosecution introduced was simply trying to discredit Kims account of her family and maybe how she really felt about him. The attorney then added that on many occasions Greg would be caught with his mothers underwear in his room. Kim says that this is true, but that she never saw him actually wear them. The prosecution is trying to point out that Greg had homosexual tendencies, even though he knew his dad would probably kil