Juridical System Been Maintained Properly †Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Juridical System Been Maintained Properly? Answer: Introduction: In the common law system, the main object of the Court of Justice is to ensure the juridical system has been maintained properly. In the early stage of the common law system there were some professional representation conducted before a judge[1]. The main objective of the judicial system is to prevent the offenders by imposing certain penal provisions on them so that the other members of the society do not engage themselves in crime. However, it was stated by certain legal practitioner that the consequences of judgment can either be beneficial to the society or it can be harmful. The beneficial effect is known as therapeutic jurisprudence. In this report, an approach has been made towards this system through a case law[2]. Court visit: I have had a court visit in the case of R vs Robertson (2017) QCA 164 and I have observed many things and gained personal knowledge that enriched my mind with certain steps regarding the Moot court practice. Accounting to Mr Byron, it is important to bring back the glory regarding the self representation and the process of legal jurisprudence should be amended[3]. In the above mentioned case, certain provisions regarding the arson what's the subject matter and the kiss was tried before the judge of the Queensland. The citation of the case is [2017] QCA 164. The subject matter of the case is attempting arson along with certain other provisions of law. In this case the applicant was the Robertson who tries to set the fire at her friends place. The file number of this case is CA 43 of 2017. DC no. 465 of 2017 (new) and DC no. 2635 of 2016. The name of the presiding judge in this case was Atkinson J and Philippides JJA. The hearing date of this case was 27th April 2017. Case summary: This case is concerned with the attempt to arson in the territory of another[4]. The accused was preliminary heard before the Lower court and sentenced him for the period of 5 years of imprisonment. In the present case an apple has been made against the order of the Lower court. There are certain Grounds mentioned under the provision of law regarding the penalty profession of the judgement-based profession[5]. There are many cases references taken by the judges of the court regarding the same offence. In Silsack v Rhode (2017) QCA, arson had been done regarding the property of another and round word was finalized with the term of 5 years of imprisonment. However it was observed by the judges of the court that the scope of this case is quite different than the other cases. It is also been stated that the person has not done the crime arson. There was an attempt has been taken by the accused. In this case the applicant prayed for an appeal reduces the sentencing order of the Lower cour t. Role and contention of the judges: It was held by Philippides J. that it is the discretionary power of the judge to decide the terms of the sentence regarding any offence. It is clear from the confession this statement of the appellant that he was engaged in an attempt to arson. It is also stated by the judge that if there are sufficient proof regarding the matter that person who have Set Fire and the house of another or attempt to commit arson without affecting the whole parts of the building, the nature of the offence will be imposed under the purview of the serious conduct. It was stated by J. Philippidesthat the appellant had an intention to affect the interest of the landlord's house and to meet the intention successfully she had torched the house of the landlord[6]. On the other hand, as per the statement made by J. Atkinson, the provision relating to the punishment of arson is wide in nature. A mere confession of the appellant cannot held him liable for the sentencing up to the period of 5 years or more. Atkinson was taken help from some presidents of the case of similar nature and state that in the act of arson, is there was no sufficient proof that leads towards the subject that the wheel of the offender was to destroy the house properly, the period of sentencing should not exceed the term of 3 years. In this case it has been observed that the lower Court has failed to analyse the various prospects of the case and therefore ordered for a sentence of 5 years. It has also been call attended by justice Atkinson that the Lord has failed to provide any profession order or intensive correction order and therefore the lower Court has to complete the rules that is mentioned under section 160 B 160 C or 160 D of the punishment and sentencing Act 1992[ 7]. As per the statement made in the sections it is the right of every offended to get a payroll when the terms of the sentences 3 years or less than 3 years. However, J Atkinson stated that the ground of appeal in this case is not revocable in nature and the jurisprudential mentality of the Lower court is sufficient regarding the sentencing procedure of the case and their food the appeal in this ground was held dismissed. Characterisation of the case: In relation to Mischaracterisation of applicants criminality contention is the judge erred by characterising the intention of the applicant as trying to torch the house, when instead her intention was just to throw a lit phonebook onto a tiled floor to create a mess, harass, and cause financial detriment. Atkinson J accepted the trial judge used it merely to mean set fire rather than to destroy[8]. It was agreed by the judge that it was a serious offending. The judge was convinced that the trial judge adequately set out his sentencing remarks. Atkinson J provided that the trial judges approach is entirely orthodox in relation to procedural fairness. The judge provided that the trial judge had considered all option and then provided prison to be the last resort. In R v Johnson it was provided by Jerred J. that where there is no fraud or no danger to safety of others, arson head sentence should be 3 years[9]. The judge provided attempted arson should carry a less severe sentence than a rson. Her Honour proceeds to consider a list of cases and appropriate sentences imposed for arson and attempted arson to determine whether the trial judges imposition of a 2 and a half year head sentence was manifestly excessive such as the case of R v Heckendorf and Wong v The Queen (2001). Functioning of the court My experience in the court is quite pleasant in nature. The stops of the court on the court room were friendly. The judges were compassionate regarding the topic of the case and apply their wide judicial mind to come into the conclusion to the case. The relevant provisions of the case are section 460 of the criminal code as well as Section 4 of the criminal code. The definition of arson has been mentioned under section 461 and Section 4 of the criminal code has stated that the action taken by the accused regarding the offence that will be prosecuted if there is a there is a will regarding the ocean has been found. Jurisprudential approach regarding the case: It has been mentioned that the objective of the judicial system in Australia is not only to prevent crime, but to create certain positive impacts on the society[10]. The beneficial impact is known as the therapeutic jurisprudence. Professor David Wexler was coined the term for the first time. Therapeutic jurisprudence derives from the jurisprudential analysis made by a judge and it was suggested by the legal researchers that an attempt has to be taken to reduce the harmful effect of law through the right applicability of therapeutic jurisprudence. Therapeutic jurisprudence enhances the role of the lawyers and judge and an approach regarding the mental healthcare has been made by way of this. The role of the judges, police, witnesses are extended to diminish the harmful effect of legal figures. It requires solving a problem by interpersonal skills[11]. In this case, it has been observed that the accused was arrested for committing arson in the house of his land lord. However, when the matter was come before the court, the judges of the court had examined all the nature of the offence and analyse all the legal supplements to come into the final decision. It was held by the court that the person had made an attempt to arson and not had committed it. Therefore, certain beneficial effects have been created by way of the judgment. his approach has been taken from the aspects of the mental and emotional welfare of persons engaged with some legal process[12]. It helps to understand the originality of the case, whether the accused really did wrong or not. This approach also creates impact on the family members of the accused. Therapeutic jurisprudence is known as the clinical legal education. Conclusion Therefore from the above mentioned paragraph it is clear that in this case the accused has confessed the commission of the offence and there are other offences had been done by the accused. It is concept by the excuse that not only our son but he is engaged in the stealing and pawning of the things related to the landlord to harm his interest. Therefore, the appeal made by the Appellant regarding the reduction of the sentencing period is dismissed by the court of law. Reference: Davis, M.R. and Bennett, D., 2015. Future directions for criminal behaviour analysis of deliberately set fire events. The psychology of arson: A practical guide to understanding and managing deliberate firesetters, p.100. Dragiewicz, M. (2015). Family law reform and domestic violence: Lessons from Australia. InComparative Perspectives on Domestic Violence: Lessons from Efforts Worldwide(pp. 127-140). Oxford University Press. Every?Palmer, S., Brink, J., Chern, T.P., Choi, W.K., Hern?Yee, J.G., Green, B., Heffernan, E., Johnson, S.B., Kachaeva, M., Shiina, A. and Walker, D., 2014. Review of psychiatric services to mentally disordered offenders around the Pacific Rim. Asia?Pacific Psychiatry, 6(1), pp.1-17. Fine, A., Cavanagh, C., Donley, S., Steinberg, L., Frick, P.J. and Cauffman, E., 2016. The role of peer arrests on the development of youths attitudes towards the justice system. Law and human behavior, 40(2), p.211. Miller, H.V. and Barnes, J.C., 2013. Genetic transmission effects and intergenerational contact with the criminal justice system: A consideration of three dopamine polymorphisms. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(6), pp.671-689. Nelson, M. J., Hinkle, R. K. (2015). Crafting the Law: How Opinion Content Influences Legal Development. Papalia, N., Thomas, S.D., Ching, H. and Daffern, M., 2015. Changes in the prevalence and nature of violent crime by youth in Victoria, Australia. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(2), pp.213-223. Pooley, K., 2015. An analysis of youth misuse of fire in New South Wales. Redlich, A.D. and Han, W., 2014. Examining the links between therapeutic jurisprudence and mental health court completion. Law and Human Behavior, 38(2), p.109. Richardson, E., Spencer, P. and Wexler, D.B., 2016. The International Framework for Court Excellence and therapeutic jurisprudence: Creating excellent courts and enhancing wellbeing. Wexler, D.B., Perlin, M.L., Vols, M., Spencer, P. and Stobbs, N., 2016. Current Issues in Therapeutic Jurisprudence [1] Dragiewicz, M. (2015). Family law reform and domestic violence: Lessons from Australia. InComparative Perspectives on Domestic Violence: Lessons from Efforts Worldwide(pp. 127-140). Oxford University Press. [2] Nelson, M. J., Hinkle, R. K. (2015). Crafting the Law: How Opinion Content Influences Legal Development. [3] Davis, M.R. and Bennett, D., 2015. Future directions for criminal behaviour analysis of deliberately set fire events. The psychology of arson: A practical guide to understanding and managing deliberate firesetters, p.100. [4] Pooley, K., 2015. An analysis of youth misuse of fire in New South Wales. [5] Papalia, N., Thomas, S.D., Ching, H. and Daffern, M., 2015. Changes in the prevalence and nature of violent crime by youth in Victoria, Australia. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 22(2), pp.213-223. [6] Every?Palmer, S., Brink, J., Chern, T.P., Choi, W.K., Hern?Yee, J.G., Green, B., Heffernan, E., Johnson, S.B., Kachaeva, M., Shiina, A. and Walker, D., 2014. Review of psychiatric services to mentally disordered offenders around the Pacific Rim. Asia?Pacific Psychiatry, 6(1), pp.1-17. [7] Richardson, E., Spencer, P. and Wexler, D.B., 2016. The International Framework for Court Excellence and therapeutic jurisprudence: Creating excellent courts and enhancing wellbeing. [8] Redlich, A.D. and Han, W., 2014. Examining the links between therapeutic jurisprudence and mental health court completion. Law and Human Behavior, 38(2), p.109. [9] Wexler, D.B., Perlin, M.L., Vols, M., Spencer, P. and Stobbs, N., 2016. Current Issues in Therapeutic Jurisprudence. [10] Fine, A., Cavanagh, C., Donley, S., Steinberg, L., Frick, P.J. and Cauffman, E., 2016. The role of peer arrests on the development of youths attitudes towards the justice system. Law and human behavior, 40(2), p.211. [11] Miller, H.V. and Barnes, J.C., 2013. Genetic transmission effects and intergenerational contact with the criminal justice system: A consideration of three dopamine polymorphisms. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 40(6), pp.671-689. [12] Redlich, A.D. and Han, W., 2014. Examining the links between therapeutic jurisprudence and mental health court completion.Law and Human Behavior, 38(2), p.109.