Business Law Court Paper Assignment Essay

On November 5, 2008, I came to observe a proceeding in the King County Superior Court where the imagines name was Shaffer Catherine. I did observe the closing arguments and the control panels motion to the casing in a criminal proceeding where subject of the subject was assault in the chip class. Mark Alan gong, as the suspect in the observed case, was supercharged with flash degree assault for punching a man named Jesse gill at a matrimony reception, and eventually knocking him d suffer to the ground.Bell was asseverate to overhear punched gill because the latter was so sexually harassing women at the wedding reception. gill, with all freedom, also alleged to have harassed Bells married woman and in return he got punched in the face by Bell. To stop the commotion caused by the harassment by d genius Gill and the eventual punching against him, people at the wedding responded by calling the police. The disk operating system ended up charging Mark Bell for assault in the second degree for the alleged punching against.With Bell having been charged with assault in second degree in a criminal proceeding, it was a big affect to me when Judge Jude Shaffer miscellanead the case into civil one because of self defence mechanism invoked by defendant Bell. At this point, the cost went to recess before bringing the jury back divulge. While in court recess, we went to the defendants attorney and asked him a couple of questions. I am not sure as to what the attorneys name besides she was the only one that was unstrained to talk to us about the case.The prosecuting officer simply walked out as soon as the court went to recess. The defendants attorney told us that the trial has been going on for about cardinal weeks then and that fortuitously the judge had decided that the defendant was not culpable to the second degree assault charge when we came to observe. The same lawyer also told us that she was stock- tranquil waiting for the jury to com e out and decide whether or not Bell should bear the money back from the state, e. g. money he had unconnected from work while in court, lawyer fees, parking fees, etc.The defendants lawyer gave us a very informative apprize and was very helpful. After talking to the defendants, lawyer the court resumed and the jury was brought into the courtroom. It was interesting to see them come proper out and sit in a very organized manner. The defendants lawyer and the prosecutor both talked to the jury and explained their side of the argument. The defendants lawyer seemed to influence the jury that the state should pay Bell all of the money that he had lost as a result of being brought to court.After the prosecutor and the defendants lawyer got done explaining their views to the jury, the judge summarized parts of the case to the jury and concluded by saying that the defendant was not guilty to the second degree assault charge. The judge then asked the jury two questions. The jury could only say a simple yes or no to separately question and nothing else. All twelve said yes to each question. Soon after that the criminal case was dismissed by the court, blessedness broke out for the defendant, his lawyer, and his family.The prosecutor quickly congratulated the defendants lawyer and walked out the court in that respectafter. Bell had about three family members that were in the court. Including us, it was a total of 5 people listening to the case. This seemed odd to me because I had constantly thought that a lot of people would be inside the court just like the movies and television shows. As we were leaving the court, we also congratulated the defendants lawyer and thanked her for the help. We asked the lawyer if we could get some documents explaining the case and what had happened during the two week trial.The lawyer gave us a case number and told us to go d profess to the sixth floor and use the computers they have there to search documents using that case numb er. We did as she had said, but unfortunately we arrange no documents as they were not yet available for this case. Part 2 Opinion This case was a very interesting event. I c heartseaselessly knew but never truly accepted the feature that any iniquity in this country could actually go to court. Protecting yourself or other(a)s could still get you into trouble and you could still be made to answer in the court of law. Mr.Bell was found by police to be the one assaulting but his act as came out of decision was in disproof of other persons including his wife from being harassed. His act of punching Gill, the harassing person, was seen by the police as an act of assault and for which intellectual he was charged with a nuisance of assault in second degree. provided since Bell was doing what was normal in humans, as found by court, in ordination to assert their right of defend other peoples honor or person, then, I call up the courts decision to change from criminal case to ci vil case must not be baseless after wall.The court whitethorn have found that there was no criminal intent on the part of the Bell to be charged of the abhorrence since Bell was amply exercising a valid of defending another person including his wife or primarily defending first his wife before the others. and so how could he be charged something when he was not doing the punching to attach Gill for nothing but was using necessary the means to alert Gill that was already out of his mastermind or perhaps committing a crime in making the harassment? Having right people to help you out and protect you in a court case or status must be interesting because ones honor or liberty is at stake.I mean the defendant could either come along or lose the case. If he loses he goes to prison or if he wins he gets free. If Mr. Bell did not have a good lawyer to help him out, he would have been totally charged with assault and would then have to face serious consequences. To have observed the de fendants lawyer in helping Mr. Bell out with all the accusations against him was kinda touching. So much pathos has to be used in order to overcome the facts on paper. In other words, the lawyer had to be randy by having others imagine if they were in such a situation.I suppose it is the human drama in court that made my court association very much interesting although I may not add up with the outcome of the courts decision. My reason for disagreeing in the decision is that I would be mad if my girlfriend was sexually harassed or other women in front of me but I find not a valid excuse to lay a hand on soulfulness else for mere harassment. I dont believe that I should have the right to defend someone else, unless they are being physically agony and even then the best thing to do is to stop the act and not cause more damage.In my understanding, Mr. Bell was never in one case touched during the wedding rather he started the fight and the damage by punching another guy. As bad as it sounds to a persons pride or ego, Mr. Bell should have totally been charged with assault. I thought that the attorney did a pretty decent job defending Mr. Bell. I mean, given the fact that I am against the outcome of the court, the lawyer must have done a good job to get him out of the trouble that I think he should be in. by chance my understanding was not supported by evidence as presented or controverted by the lawyer as there is the possibility that the fight did not rightfully start from Mr. Bell and that he was acting in defense of his wifes honor. If such was the real case borne by evidence, I believe there should be justification for the dismissal of the charge against Bell. To believe this latter version would seem reasonable because the punch was in curb response to the dishonor caused to the wife due to the harassment.I mean punching a man by another to the defend a wifes honor need not me unreasonable enough to justify the assault. just then as I said, this la tter version is different from my own understanding as stated earlier. The trial could be described as well run with the defense lawyer, prosecutor, the judge and the jury having performed their functions in the case. But again, since I do not agree with the decision due to my own understanding of the facts, I feel not emotionally at ease with the way things have come about.However, the fact that the criminal proceeding was change to civil proceeding and the fact that the judge had the agreement from the jury on the questions propounded, it stands to good reason that perhaps justice is served upon the accused or defendant. The fact the lawyer also mentioned about the defendant having to claim the lost occur of money or damages against as a result of Bell being dragged to court, may be taken as a reason to merit the strength of the decision acquitting the defendant.To sum it all, I believe the difference of my opinion as to what should have been done by court and my contrariety wi th the result would have to be considered really on the basis of what really happened as borne by evidence. Since I may not know the issue facts if my only basis is my observation, I believe I should have the approach path to more information that may have to answer questions in my mind as to the result of this case. I believe the case is important or any even any case that would merit the attention of the judge and jury.To be brought to court which could put ones life, honor, property or person at stake must be of paramount importance. nonentity wants to have a guilty person set free but nobody wants to see an innocent person also to be in jail. Work cited TITLE LXII, Criminal Code, Chapter 631, Assault And Related Offenses, Section 6312, web document URL, http//www. gencourt. state. nh. us/rsa/html/LXII/631/631-2. htm, Accessed November 18, 2008