Court Visit Paper

Court visit
Student:
Professor:
Course title:
Date:
Abstract
This paper provides an account of the observation made during a court visiting on 25th May 2015 at King County Superior Court in Seattle, Washington. The procedure was motion hearing. There was a jury of 40 people who responded to questions from the presiding judge, Judge Mary Roberts. The subject of the hearing was Tort Motor Vehicle. After hearing to both sides of the lawsuit, the judge issued an order to deny the motion. This motion hearing was different than what I have seen on TV. Unlike on TV, the hearing was very comprehensive and quite a few important things were noted during the motion hearing that could not be noted on television. Nonetheless, the motion hearing is not very much different than those of Canada, England, and Ireland.
Court visit
The type of procedure that I observed is motion hearing. I conclude that this was a motion hearing since lawyers argued before a judge and obtained rulings on testimony or evidence prior to the commencement of the trial. Before the motion hearing, the defense attorneys had filed a motion in writing and orally argued its merits during the motion hearing. The opposing lawyer responded to the written motion before the court proceeding. In this response, the defense counsel offered reasons as to why the motion should not be granted.
There was a jury that comprised 40 individuals: 20 men and 20 women. Each one of them had an A4 size card which they used to respond to each question from the judge. These individuals come from various occupations since some were professional teachers, some were college students, while others worked in hospitals. The judge began by asking general questions, for instance he asked: is there anyone who is familiar with Redmond intersection? The defendant was then introduced. This motion hearing had been requested by one of the defendant’s attorney, and the proceeding gave each party in the lawsuit a chance to present their side of the issue in the courthouse. During the motion hearing, the lawyer of each party was given the opportunity of presenting factual evidence and legal arguments supporting his client’s position. The defense attorney of the defendant made arguments to the judge that a particular evidence should be thrown out and suppressed; the evidence from surveillance a camera. The lawyer argued that the case should not be based just on the camera. As the hearing progressed, the judge asked questions as regards the legal and factual issues at hand. In the end, the judge issued an order to deny the motion.
This motion hearing was different than what I have seen on television in that unlike watching on television, the hearing was very detailed and several important things were noted during the hearing that could not be noted on television. Unlike on television for instance, the motion hearing revealed that when a party to a lawsuit files a written motion with the courthouse, he or she should also mail or give a duplicate to the other party. If the other party in the lawsuit is represented by a defense attorney, the individual should mail or give a duplicate to that party’s defense counsel. Moreover, what was revealed in the motion hearing that could not...