Pretrial and Trial

This paper will discuss certain aspects of the criminal trial in Great Britain and compare them to the criminal trial in the United States. The paper is divided into two parts. The first part will focus upon pretrial procedures and defendants' rights. The primary focus will be upon the ability of the police to arrest a suspect, the right to legal representation, the right against self-incrimination, and the admissibility of evidence. The second part of the paper will focus upon the various attributes of the jury system in the criminal trial. The main emphasis of this discussion will be jury selection, especially the ability of both sides to uncover jurors biases and to challenge prospective jurors.

The basic structure of pretrial procedure in England is similar to that in the United States. This fact should not be surprising, given that the U.S. legal system was basically imported from England in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Many of the protections which Americans have come to expect originated in England in the years preceding the great emigration to North America. However, differences between the two systems arose in the years following the U.S. independence movement. Many of the differences were the result of differing responses to the professionalization of the criminal justice system in the Western World in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Cen

. . .
vidence Obtained During a Search The rules concerning the admissibility of evidence seized during a search differ between England and the United States. In the United States, a search must either be consented to by the suspect or be authorized by a warrant issued by a judge. If the search is neither consented to nor authorized, the materials seized during the course of this search are inadmissible as evidence. In addition, any further evidence derived from this search is inadmissible. This means that if the police find leads during their illegal search, any evidence derived from these leads are inadmissible as evidence. This is the infamous "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine. In England, the rules concerning search and seizure were traditionally more liberal. For instance, it has long been lawful for the police to search the premises of a suspect without either the suspect's consent or a search warrant issued by a judge. This is true whether the suspect is arrested on these premises or elsewhere. Furthermore, even if the search conducted by the police was illegal, the evidence seized during this search is not inadmissible as evidence. As noted in the previous section concerning confessions, it was not even clea
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Amendment Constitution, Guidelines Checks, Crown Court, John Major, Parliament Britain, Judges' Rules, Additionally PACE, United England, Islands Isle, Cause Besides, peremptory challenges, peremptory challenge, remain silent, criminal justice, adverse inferences, magistrates' court, prima facie, crown court, accusatorial system, defense counsel, criminal justice system, adverse inferences drawn, establish prima facie, fruit poisonous tree, defendant remain silent,
Approximate Word count = 10626
Approximate Pages = 43 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Pretrial and Trial