Threaded 3. Week 3 Discussion: Courts
Supporting Lectures:
- Ethics and Courts
- Trial Court Workgroup
- Judges and Ethics
The discussion assignment provides a forum for discussing relevant topics for this week on the basis of the course competencies covered. For this assignment, make sure you post your initial response to the Discussion Area by the due date assigned.
To support your work, use your course and text readings and also use the South
University Online Library. As in all assignments, cite your sources in your work and provide references for the citations in APA format.
Start reviewing and responding to the postings of your classmates as early in the week as possible. Respond to at least two of your classmates’ initial postings. Participate in the discussion by asking a question, providing a statement of clarification, providing a point of view with a rationale, challenging an aspect of the discussion, or indicating a relationship between two or more lines of reasoning in the discussion. Cite sources in your responses to other classmates. Complete your participation for this assignment by the end of the week.
This week, you began addressing the ethical foundations of specific functions in the criminal justice system. For this discussion, we will focus on the courts.
- During the 2016 presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton was criticized for an interview in which she laughingly described how she managed to get a violent defendant released despite knowing he was guilty. As a defense attorney, her duty required her best efforts at defending her client, yet often doing so will conflict with the attorney’s personal ethics. Should defense attorneys, when appointed by the court to represent indigent defendants, be required to always act in the best interest of the client, even if doing so conflicts with his or her ethical system?
- When ruling on matters of evidence, and when imposing a sentence, judges are expected to apply the law as written. Are judges in criminal cases bound by ethics to adhere to the law, regardless of their personal views on a case? Use the issue of minimum mandatory sentencing as a basis for discussion.