Difference between revisions of "Judge"
(Stub) |
(change from "employment" to "concept") |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | {{ | + | {{concept |
| − | | | + | |wikipedia=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judge |
| + | |description=A '''judge''' is a person who presides over [[court]] proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | A '''judge''' is a person who presides over [[court]] proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different [[jurisdiction]]s. | ||
| + | ==Official Story== | ||
| + | The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and, typically, in an [[in open court|open court]]. The judge hears all the [[witness]]es and any other [[evidence]] presented by the barristers or solicitors of the case, assesses the credibility and [[arguments]] of the parties, and then issues a ruling on the matter at hand based on their interpretation of the law and their own personal judgment. In some jurisdictions, the judge's powers may be shared with a [[jury]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Types of judges== | ||
| + | The adversarial system or adversary system is a legal system used in the common law countries like the [[United States]], where two advocates represent their parties' case or position before an impartial person or group of people, usually a judge or jury, who attempt to determine the truth and pass judgment accordingly. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In nonadversarial systems of [[criminal investigation]] (also known as inquisitorial systems), a judge might also be an [[examining magistrate]]. The presiding judge ensures that all court proceedings are lawful and orderly. Inquisitorial systems are used primarily in countries with civil legal systems, such as [[France]] and [[Italy]], or legal systems based on [[Islamic law]] like [[Saudi Arabia]]. | ||
{{SMWDocs}} | {{SMWDocs}} | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
{{reflist}} | {{reflist}} | ||
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 12:44, 20 April 2021
 Judge    | |
|---|---|
| A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges |
A judge is a person who presides over court proceedings, either alone or as a part of a panel of judges. The powers, functions, method of appointment, discipline, and training of judges vary widely across different jurisdictions.
Contents
Official Story
The judge is supposed to conduct the trial impartially and, typically, in an open court. The judge hears all the witnesses and any other evidence presented by the barristers or solicitors of the case, assesses the credibility and arguments of the parties, and then issues a ruling on the matter at hand based on their interpretation of the law and their own personal judgment. In some jurisdictions, the judge's powers may be shared with a jury.
Types of judges
The adversarial system or adversary system is a legal system used in the common law countries like the United States, where two advocates represent their parties' case or position before an impartial person or group of people, usually a judge or jury, who attempt to determine the truth and pass judgment accordingly.
In nonadversarial systems of criminal investigation (also known as inquisitorial systems), a judge might also be an examining magistrate. The presiding judge ensures that all court proceedings are lawful and orderly. Inquisitorial systems are used primarily in countries with civil legal systems, such as France and Italy, or legal systems based on Islamic law like Saudi Arabia.
Office Holders on Wikispooks
| Name | From | To |
|---|---|---|
| Christopher Nicholson | 1 January 1996 | July 2010 |
| Marie-Anne Tan-De Sonnaville | 1991 | 1991 |
| Marie-Anne Tan-De Sonnaville | 1985 | |
| Joseph Golia | 1982 | 2012 |
Related Quotation
| Page | Quote | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas Jefferson | “To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves.” | Thomas Jefferson | 1820 |
