Legal Rights Essay Example for Free

Legal Rights EssayCriminals construct heavy accountabilitys during mental test procedures. With away these declines in that respect would be so much confusion and controversy in the court system today. There are quaternion of them that I will give a brief summarization of and explain to you the consequences that could possibly happen if these legal respectables were no longer upheld in the court system today. They are the right to confront witnesses, the right to an jolly panel, the right to counsel at trial, and last but not least the right to be skilled trial. The right to confront witnesses is legal right. The sixth amendment gives the defendant the right to be confronted by the witnesses against them (Larry J. Siegel, 2012, 2010). This essentially gives the right for the defendant to have the witness me to court and give them the ability to look the witness right in the mettle. This also gives the defendants lawyer the right to question the witness. If this rig ht wasnt upheld then(prenominal) in that respect would in all probability be a luck of false statements or accusations in the trial.It would also be ticklish to confirm whether or not the witness it telling the truth, because anyone can pick up a alternate of paper and write down what they want to, but when it comes to looking that person right in the eye it makes a whole green goddess of difference, because it gives the defense a chance to look at the body talking to of the witness and also, when it comes to the matching up of the statements, the witness could write down something, but then when it comes to testifying if they are equivocation then what they wrote down and what they are actually saying could be totally different and if this right was no longer upheld in that location could be innocent people going to throw out or a lot of break throughlaws acquire away with the crime that they have affiliated.Also if the legal right wasnt upheld how could the jury or the judge go off of a written statement that could have be written by anyone, if this right wasnt upheld, then there would be so galore(postnominal) written statements on two sides, because they wouldnt have to testify during trial, it would be a whole lot easier for people to get off, because it would essentially be he say, she say information, but the fact of having to actually go to court and testify downstairs oath, puts you in a whole entire ball field so it helps in a lot of ways, because not only does it help the d defense but it helps the prose trailors also.The right to an impartial jury basically fashion that, the jurors who they select for the trial know absolutely no one who is on the trial, none of the attorneys, the judge, the defendant or the plaintiff. They also cant know anything about the trial. No one on the jury can be biased. If this legal right wasnt upheld then the ruling of the case, wouldnt be fair and there would be a lot of people taking different si des just because of the person that they know.It wouldnt be fair to the defendant or the plaintiff, because if the jury knew something about the case or knew of the person who committed the crime or of the person who the crime was committed upon then the jury would have mixed feelings and would probably never reach a decision which could cause a hung jury, which would probably let a vicious walk free. Also if anyone in the jury knew the judge, the prosecutor or the defense lawyer and they worked one of their cases or convicted them of a crime previously then they would probably just consume a side out of spite. Having an impartial jury is not only trade good for the defendant, but also for the prosecutor and plaintiff also, because if there was someone on the jury that had something against the plaintiff or prosecutor then they would probably just choose in favor of the defense just because of the grudge that they had against that party.The right to counsel means that the defenda nt has the right to have the assistance to counsel in the defendants defense and if they cant afford one then one would be appointed to them by the court. If this right wasnt upheld then there would be a lot of cases that would probably be ruled in favor of the plaintiff just because of the lack of companionship of the defendant. Also there would probably be a lot of criminals behind bars, because then they wouldnt have a lawyer to speak on there be half and try to work out a lighter sentence on their behalf. There probably would not be as many an(prenominal) probation officers, because with the defendants being locked up then the options of them having probation or community service would be cut out of the picture.With a lawyer they help out the defendants a lot in trials, because the lawyer can work with the prosecutor and come up with many other options other than jail time. They can also help the defendant and show them ways and other things to do before trial to help them get a lesser or lighter sentence. Without the criminals having the right to counsel then there would be a lot of ruinful accusations on the defendants side also it would be easier for the jury to side with the prosecutor because with the lack of knowledge the defendant probably wouldnt be competent to get the information that they need for trial together.The right to be competent at trial means that in order to stand trial a criminal defendant must be in there right state of mind and understand the nature and extent of the legal proceedings. Also if the defendant is considered mentally unstable then the trial must be postponed until treatment renders him capable of participating in his own defense (Larry J. Siegel, 2012, 2010).If this right was no longer upheld then every trial would be partial and a lot of mentally unstable people would be in jail instead of getting proper treatment in the right facility. Also if it wasnt upheld then the defendant wouldnt be able to render the trea tment that he/she needs to be able to stand trial. Also the criminal would probably try to act as his own counsel which, because they arent in there right state of mind and say or do things that he/she wouldnt understand, because they arent in there right state of mind and would they would get a harsher sentence for the crime.There are so many things that could go wrong if these legal rights werent in place. There are many cases that has happened and thats why we have these legal rights to day. In my opinion I feel that these rights are in effect for good reasons, because regardless of the person everyone should have rights. Without these legal rights there would be so much corruption and wrong doing in the courts today.