Essay Reflecting on your Court Visit FLS - Final Draft 2 PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Essay Reflecting on your Court Visit FLS - Final Draft 2 PDF

Description

(1) Student Number: 18061920 Word Count: 718

Essay Reflecting on your Court Visit On 11th October 2018, I visited Oxford Magistrates’ Court and witnessed a bail hearing. I have included a brief case summary prior to reflecting and analysing my experience.

Case Summary: On October 6th at 9am, the defendant was welcomed into to the victim’s home. At 11am, the defendant and victim were both intoxicated, and the defendant began calling the victim names. The victim then became distressed and left the hallway where the name-calling was taking place and entered the other room. The defendant soon followed. The victim then said she had a felt ‘something forceful’ pushed against her body that caused her to fall. Though out of direct sight, the victim suspected that this was the work of the defendant, given his close proximity. Mr G (lodger at the victim’s house) was asked by the victim to call the police, which he did. The situation defused before the police arrived: the defendant and victim separated themselves. Upon arrival, the police arrested the defendant under suspicion of common assault.

Points of Reflection: The particulars of the case: A recent battery offense committed by the defendant was employed by the prosecution counsel in support of their main argument: ‘the degree of physical harm the defendant posed to others’. However, it was unclear to me how relevant this particular offense was in relation to this bail hearing. This was because no context had been provided surrounding the offense and so I was mostly unconvinced of its mention. However, upon reflection, I reasoned that the battery offense, in and of itself, would sufficiently prove that the defendant had propensity to harm others. It was this understanding which revealed very little need to include the context and so, in the interest of being concise, was rightfully omitted. The need to be concise, whenever and wherever possible, is one of the many parallels that can be drawn between this bail hearing and my understanding of legal writing. When citing law reports to support legal arguments, I have found that selected words and/or phrases amply summarise the key principle(s) of law that arises from each report.

Another reflection point occurred when I heard the phrase ‘had a round of cider before my [her] statement’ in the victim’s witness statement. There was a degree of ambiguity surrounding it; did the victim drink the cider before submitting her statement or before writing her statement? There is a clear distinction between these two questions. The former would

(2) Student Number: 18061920 Word Count: 718 mean that the victim could have written the statement whilst still sober thereby adding greater credibility to the weighting of her words. The latter, however, undermines this exact advantage and her existing credibility as an alcoholic confirmed when she said ‘a drink does affect my [her] memory’. Retrospectively, the lack of certainty in the victim’s choice of words was an all-important lesson on how not to write: I will need to appreciate this before progressing further with my legal studies, as a lack of specificity could amount to the formation of a misinformed legal argument. This is particularly true if is the ratio decidendi is improperly identified or incorrectly cited when constructing a legal argument.

Though I was unable to see the outcome of the case, it does resemble a similar case I have encountered, namely DPP v Little (1992) 1 All ER 299. This case exemplified that an assault is committed when a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force. Under Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, an offence of Common Assault is committed when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery. Considering these facts, I believe the defendant would be found guilty of common assault and by extension his bail should not be granted.

Courtroom observations: Though there were three magistrates, I observed only the centre magistrate was speaking at any given time. By considering the wider implications of this formality, it suggested that courtroom proceedings follow a set structure; since only one magistrate spoke, there was a degree of organized, coherent conversation between legal parties, as either counsel would address their responses to one person as opposed to all three. It follows that structure is a integral part of legal practice, especially when communicating. Structure provides an extended writing piece with a coordinated framework in which ideas and supporting evidence can be sensibly arranged so as to persuade the reader to appreciate a particular position on a legal issue. It is this appreciation of alternative valid arguments that cannot be achieved without the reader having a clear understanding of what is being argued and the evidence presented to substantiate it. Ultimately, a poorly structured argument is an unintelligible one; and an unintelligible argument is an unconvincing one. In conclusion, these reflections have better informed my approach towards legal writing and will act as important guidelines as I endeavour to express my arguments in a clear, concise and coherent manner....