Question

In 2004, Scott Peterson was convicted of killing his wife Laci and their unborn son Conner. There was no conclusive proof he committed the crime, only circumstantial evidence. The jurors said a major factor in their decision was Peterson's nonverbal communication, his lack of emotional responsiveness, and "stony demeanor, even during wrenching testimony about his dead wife and son." Question: Should jurors be allowed to see a defendant during a trial, or should a law be put in place that sets the defendant out of the jury's view so as to not influence their decision? This question is an opportunity for you to use your critical thinking skills. Remember to use evidence and logic to support your answer. Your paper should include thoughts on the language games played in a courtroom, including nonverbal language games. Consider too, what manipulative elements may be present in verbal and nonverbal language games in a courtroom. You should consider the goals of the defense verses the prosecution and how each might use language accordingly. It may be helpful to review the different tools of rhetoric like the use of hyperbole, euphemisms, dysphemisms, sarcasm, emotive language, and persuasive definitions. Are these tools of rhetoric just as available in verbal language as nonverbal language?

Answer 1

Serious criminal offences are dealt with in a court of law, with a judge and a jury. The jury is a group of twelve people who been randomly selected from the local area. During the trial the jury listens to all the evidence presented by the defence and the prosecution The jurors then talk in private and thy come to a verdict.

The jury should base their decisions on :-

A jury should make a decision based on what they see and hear in the courtroom. However jurors might be affected by other factors. How a defendant looks,acts or sounds affects how they are viewed by a ury. We often base our decision on a few features that are stereotypical.

Removing the defendant from the eyes of jury would be more likely to be unjust in many cases , although it might be more objectively fair from another perspective .The jury's job is not merely to be a dispassionate observer ,but to also provide a morla and ethical balance to the application of the law to any specific defendant .