Truth in the U.S. Court System
The U.S. has a dual court system comprising of the state and federal court systems. The federal courts usually hear both civil and criminal cases that involve the constitution, treaties, federal laws, and has special jurisdiction with regard to matters relating to federal tax and bankruptcy. State courts on the other hand hear civil and criminal matters concerning state laws as well as state constitutional matters.
As far as the structure of the U.S. Court System is concerned, it was to some extent inherited from the English common law system hence it is adversarial in nature. As an adversarial system, litigating parties usually present their cases before a fact finder who is a judge or the jury. The fact finder usually an impartial person(s) and largely remain passive during the course of a trial. The arguments made by each litigating party are conveyed by attorneys. In the criminal justice system, the accused persons have a right to representation by attorneys of their choice and the state provides court-appointed attorneys for accused persons who are unable to afford an attorney.
Each party to a dispute presents its evidence and testimony in accordance with set trial procedures and proper courtroom etiquettes relating to how the testimony and evidence is to be presented. The rules of presentation are aimed at promoting fairness throughout the process by making sure that each party to a dispute is accorded the right to be heard. The fact that the neutral arbiter remains passive during trial proceedings as each party presents their testimonies, examine and cross-examine witnesses, collect and submit evidence means that the process is more geared towards administering justice and not finding the truth.
The plea bargaining process is also a clear aspect that shows that the criminal justice system in America is not about the truth. Another indication of failure to focus on the law is depicted by what is regarded as ‘jury nullification’ where a defendant is acquitted on the basis that the jury differs with a law, grandstanding by layers, and discriminatory police procedures (Peak, 2012, p. 139). The adversarial system usually produces a winner and a loser. The desire to be on the winning side is what motivates the parties thus there is no consideration for the truth.
References
Peak J. (2012). Justice Administration: Police, Courts, and Corrections Management 7th Ed.
New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
