Editing Criminal justice (section)

===Courts===
{{Main|Court}}
[[File:Microcosm of London Plate 058 - Old Bailey edited.jpg|thumb|A trial at the [[Old Bailey]] in [[London]], {{Circa|1808}}]]
The courts serve as the venue where disputes are settled and justice is then administered. With regard to criminal justice, there are a number of critical people in any court setting. These critical people are referred to as the courtroom work group and include both professional and non professional individuals. These include the [[judge]], [[prosecutor]], and the [[defense attorney]]. The judge, or magistrate, is a person, elected or appointed, who is knowledgeable in the law, and whose function is to objectively administer the legal proceedings and offer a final decision to dispose of a case.

In the U.S. and in a growing number of nations, [[guilt (law)|guilt]] or innocence (although in the U.S. a jury can never find a defendant "innocent" but rather "not guilty") is decided through the [[adversarial system]]. In this system, two parties will both offer their version of events and [[Argument|argue]] their case before the court (sometimes before a judge or panel of judges, sometimes before a jury). The case should be decided in favor of the party who offers the most sound and compelling arguments based on the law as applied to the facts of the case.

The prosecutor, or district attorney, is a [[lawyer]] who brings charges against a person, persons or corporate entity. It is the prosecutor's duty to explain to the court what crime was committed and to detail what [[evidence]] has been found which incriminates the accused. The prosecutor should not be confused with a [[plaintiff]] or plaintiff's counsel. Although both serve the function of bringing a complaint before the court, the prosecutor is a servant of the state who makes accusations on behalf of the state in criminal proceedings, while the plaintiff is the complaining party in civil proceedings.

A defense attorney counsels the accused on the a legal process, likely outcomes for the accused and suggests strategies. The accused, not the lawyer, has the right to make final decisions regarding a number of fundamental points, including whether to testify, and to accept a plea offer or demand a jury trial in appropriate cases. It is the defense attorney's duty to represent the interests of the client, raise procedural and evidentiary issues, and hold the prosecution to its burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Defense counsel may challenge evidence presented by the prosecution or present exculpatory evidence and argue on behalf of their client. At trial, the defense attorney may attempt to offer a [[rebuttal]] to the prosecutor's accusations.

In the U.S., accused people are entitled to a government-paid defense attorney if the individual is in jeopardy of losing life and/or liberty. Those who cannot afford a private attorney may be provided one by the state. Historically, however, the right to a defense attorney has not always been universal. For example, in [[Tudor period|Tudor]] England criminals accused of [[treason]] were not permitted to offer arguments in their defense. In many jurisdictions, there is no right to an appointed attorney, if the accused is not in jeopardy of losing his or her liberty.

The final determination of guilt or innocence is typically made by a third party, who is supposed to be disinterested. This function may be performed by a judge, a panel of judges, or a [[jury]] panel composed of unbiased citizens. This process varies depending on the laws of the specific jurisdiction. In some places the panel (be it judges or a jury) is required to issue a unanimous decision, while in others only a majority [[vote]] is required. In America, this process depends on the state, level of court, and even agreements between the prosecuting and defending parties. Some nations do not use juries at all, or rely on theological or military authorities to issue verdicts.

Some cases can be disposed of without the need for a trial. In fact, the vast majority are. If the accused confesses his or her guilt, a shorter process may be employed and a judgment may be rendered more quickly. Some nations, such as America, allow [[plea bargaining]] in which the accused pleads guilty, [[nolo contendere]] or not guilty, and may accept a diversion program or reduced punishment, where the prosecution's case is weak or in exchange for the cooperation of the accused against other people. This reduced sentence is sometimes a reward for sparing the state the expense of a formal trial. Many nations do not permit the use of plea bargaining, believing that it coerces innocent people to plead guilty in an attempt to avoid a harsh punishment. The courts nowadays are seeking alternative measures as opposed to throwing someone into prison right away.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Punished|last=Rios|first=Victor|year=2011|pages=108}}</ref>

The entire trial process, whatever the country, is fraught with problems and subject to criticism. [[Bias]] and [[discrimination]] form an ever-present threat to an objective decision. Any [[prejudice]] on the part of the lawyers, the judge, or jury members threatens to destroy the court's credibility. Some people argue that the often Byzantine rules governing courtroom conduct and processes restrict a layman's ability to participate, essentially reducing the legal process to a battle between the lawyers. In this case, the criticism is that the decision is based less on sound justice and more on the lawyer's eloquence and [[charisma]]. This is a particular problem when the lawyer performs in a substandard manner. The jury process is another area of frequent criticism, as there are few mechanisms to guard against poor judgment or incompetence on the part of the layman jurors. Judges themselves are very subject to bias subject to things as ordinary as the length of time since their last break.<ref>"We find that the percentage of favorable rulings drops gradually from ≈65% to nearly zero within each decision session and returns abruptly to ≈65% after a break." {{cite journal |author1=Shai Danzigera |author2=Jonathan Levav |author3=Liora Avnaim-Pessoa| title=Extraneous factors in judicial decisions |date=11 April 2011 |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America |volume=108 |issue=17 |pages=6889–92 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1018033108 |pmid=21482790 |bibcode=2011PNAS..108.6889D |pmc=3084045|doi-access=free }}</ref>

Manipulations of the court system by defense and prosecution attorneys, law enforcement as well as the defendants have occurred and there have been cases where justice was denied.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Perri | first1 = Frank S. | last2 = Lichtenwald | first2 = Terrance G. | year = 2009 | title = When Worlds Collide: Criminal Investigative Analysis, Forensic Psychology And the Timothy Masters Case | url = http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/support-files/criminal-profiling.pdf | journal = Forensic Examiner | volume = 18 | issue = 2| page = 226972 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Perri | first1 = Frank S. | last2 = Lichtenwald | first2 = Terrance G. | year = 2010 | title = The Last Frontier: Myths & The Female Psychopathic Killer | url = http://www.all-about-forensic-psychology.com/support-files/female-psychopathic-killers.pdf | journal = Forensic Examiner | volume = 19 | issue = 2| pages = 50–67 }}</ref>