Free Essay On Place & Time Of Trial

Introduction

On 5th of December 2001, Mr. Billy Ray committed a murder on a girl. After that, Mr. Ray was not arrested due to lack of evidence. His arrest came almost two years after, when the authorities discovered the little girl’s body, the girl who is being alleged to have been murdered by Billy Ray. Mr. Ray was denied bail and locked in a local jail as he awaits his trial. Meanwhile, the forensic criminal investigators were running analyzes on the degraded body of the little girl, a process that took two years for enough evidence be collected from the victim’s body. Evidence from the forensic lab led to the return of prosecution on Billy’s trial. On 1st August 2005, the prosecutor arraigned Mr. Ray, offering a trial date to be on 1st October. However, the defense asks six months continuance, the main reason being fear of compromise of justice due to the recent publicity of the case. The judge granted the defense request. Upon completion of the six months, the defense again asks for another six months or change of prosecution venue, but the judge grants none of the requests. Lack of granting the request made the defense dismiss the charge, citing lack of speedy trial as the main reason.

Analysis of the Judge’s verdicts

In my opinion, the judge made a right judgment on Ray`s case. In any court setting, the deferred prosecution is totally allowed for a number of reasons, but its primary function is to give room for dismissal of the charges that may have prejudice. In this case, the defendant of Mr. Ray was granted a six months in accordance with the law. Additionally, it also helps in separation of powers violation. Therefore, the judge was in order to grant the defendant’s first request of six months’ continuance. There is a stated limit on the agreements regarding deferred prosecution, a discretion that can be reached by the judge who is heading the trial. Moreover, this can also be agreed by a circuit court. In case a deferred prosecution that may result in dismissal, it must be done in a circuit court because district courts don’t have such jurisdictions. When the judge rejected the defense’s second set of the request, the judge acted in accordance with the concept of natural justice applied. Natural justice requires that the action or prosecution should be taken at a reasonable time, besides hearing of the accused and making of non-partisan and impartial decisions. Their decisions should be in accordance with their oaths that require them to “impartially and faithfully perform and discharge their duties in the delivery of justice.” Moreover, the public’s confidence in the judge shall also greatly help in the administration of justice. For a judge to perceive himself as impartial, it must come from the public. However, this should not compromise the delivery of justice since the judge is out to act and promote the confidence of the public, a case that would be possible with Billy’s trial. It’s quite evident that Mr. Ray’s defense asked for six months’ continuation since the case’s publicity was still high and, therefore, would compromise justice administration. Therefore, the judge’s failure to grant the second set of the defense’s request can be regarded as intra vires or within the law. The defense’s dismissal of the charge on a claim of lack of speedy trial can be treated as lack of proper understanding of the law, more specifically the natural justice and its underlying rules. Therefore, the judgment was made within the law and in accordance to any required protocols.