scribbles tagged ‘court’

power, pride & addictions

Wednesday, November 28th, 2007 | tags: , , ,  |

The Seattle Federal court building is very impressive in both size and contemporary design.   The architects  NBBJ  provide a  project description of the building on their website.   The Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce also provides some statistics and stories about the building.  

Unlike the  Reading Crown court I was:

  • – allowed to take my camera into the building but had to promise  not to take  photographs.
  • – warned about the $100 for my cell-phone ringing in a court room.  
  • – required to produce a photo ID.  
  • – directed to a standalone touch-sensitive display system with terminals on every floor  that provided information about the court cases and the building.

I asked if the Murals and Sculptures in the huge atrium were exceptions to the no-photography rule.   Alas,  they weren’t.     Like the English Crown court the Federal court deals with criminal cases.

Its difficult to estimate the ‘interestingness’ of a case from its title on the  touch sensitive display system:  “The USA vs (person or corporation’s name)”.   I chose a court where I discovered the judge was accepting guilty pleas and setting pre-sentencing requirements such as psychiatric and drugs assessments.     The two  cases I watched  were illegal drug possession (Valium, Zoloft)  by a diabetic in pain because of a kidney disorder who had just lost her job in a pharmacy.   The second case was a violation of a parole requirement  to avoid alcohol by an alcoholic.

A striking design feature of this courtroom was how similar it is to the court-rooms I’ve seen in US films.   There is a central isle through the public gallery to a low gate marking the entrance to  the main court area.   The barrier is purely symbolic,   anyone could step over the low-wall,   gate dividing the court from the public gallery.  The public and the lawyers enter by walking down the isle.   In the UK the door to the public gallery appears to be separate none of the court officials have to walk through the public.   Depending on their status the  accused enters  through the public gallery (not yet  proven guilty of anything) or  wearing  prison gear from a door in the main court area.     Just before the judge entered the room the court clerk banged a gavel three times and called out ‘all rise’.

The Seattle  federal court building has the  declaration of independence decorating a low wall and is reflected (backwards) on the the floor in front of the Court building.   This struck me as curious.   A supersticious person might think that the declaration of independence written backwards was an omen of loss of freedom.    Writing the document on the floor means  that  any one can walk on  it,   placing it on a long low wall is just too tempting for many dogs whos natural inclination  might well be considered disrespectful of National treasure.  

power, pride & addictions
rate wendys scribble

what do you think of that »

cro n c urt

Friday, November 23rd, 2007 | tags: , , , ,  |

In the UK the crown court is a criminal court.   The security guards asked “are you coming in or not?”     to explain my loitering “I’m a tourist,   can I come in?   I have a camera” they helpfully  direct me  to check my camera into their lockers.   Without a camera I felt naked.  

Wendy:   can you recommend a court with an interesting case?

receptionist:   I have no idea what counts as interesting

bewigged-lady:   there’s a grumpy judge in court 1 and he’s probably going to shout at me

besuited lady: there are some ongoing cases in courts 5 and 6

The bewigged and besuited ladies started discussing the merits of the various court rooms.   I wandered off to court 1 to discover  an appeal against  the police-revocation of a gun licence.   The appellant had originally declared his previous criminal conviction for car theft when applying for,   and receiving,    the original gun licence.   The police admitted that they had not checked  how the stolen car was subsequently used – in an armed robbery.  

The police  had new information that they believed made giving the appelant a gun licence a very risky proposition.   The appellant’s right to  natural justice  required that their appeal  could address  the information that the Pollice used to make the revocation decision.   The police did not want the appellant to know the information they had used in this judgement.   This case was unique and the lawyers introduced lots of similar, yet different cases as they discussed how to proceed.

The character witnesses in the public gallery behind me,   looked like UK versions of the Soprano’s.   Posh suits,   short haircuts,   regional accents.   Phrases I overheard from the character witnesses included

they’re talking about whether or not he’ll find out  what the police have  got on him

that will cost him another 20k

his ex-wife must have talked

The judge appeared genuinely concerned about the appellants ability to exterminate vermine being curtailed by having  his gun licence revoked.   The witnesses giggled.

In the courts people wore wigs,   held bibles above their hearts and swore poetic oaths,   bowed to the judge,   debated points of law.   All dressed ‘well’,   even the juries.   I was undoubtebly the scruffiest person in the building in my anachronistic mountain equipment jacket.

cro n c urt
rate wendys scribble

what do you think of that »