In legal terminology, contempt refers to any willful disobedience to, or disregard of, a court order or any misconduct in the presence of a court; action that interferes with a judge's ability to administer justice or that insults the dignity of the court. There are both civil and criminal contempts and the line distinguishing the two often blurs. The defiant person is called the contemnor.
Yes, it is right for a judge to do that because that kind of information is more prejudicial than it is interrogative.
2007-02-13 03:42:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Retired From Y!A 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Contempt of Court is when one disobeys a direct order from the Court.
Yes the judge has the right to hold past information from the jury because it is not associated with the present case and a person can not be tried for a crime that they had already been convicted on twice that would be double jeopardy
2007-02-13 11:44:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by glamour04111 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Contempt of Court is when one disobeys a direct order from the Court.
IT IS CRITICAL for the judge to withhold certain information abot defendant's previous history because it could and would prejudice a jury regarding the crime the defendant is currently being charged with.
2007-02-13 11:38:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Starla_C 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
In the UK Courts, a person may be held in contempt of court who:
Wilfully insults
the court
a witness before the court
an officer of the court
a solicitor or counsel having business at the court
either
during the sitting or attendance at court
in going or returning to court
Or who wilfully interrupts the proceedings of the court or otherwise misbehaves in court.
As may a person who disobeys an order or direction of the court.
It's a basic tenet of English law that a person can only be convicted on the basis of evidence put before the court, thus it is the business of the prosecution to prove that he/she DID commit the offence rather than "probably did 'cos he's done it before".
The previous record is brought into play once a verdict has been returned and not before, purely as an aid to sentencing.
Otherwise you or I might be convicted of, let's say, speeding, just because we have been before, whereas on this particular occasion we really didn't.
2007-02-13 12:12:34
·
answer #4
·
answered by champer 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is a stalwart of English law that the defendant must be convicted on the evidence alone. Previous conviction history is often kept from the jury.
Contempt of court can really be anything that the judge gets pi55ed off about. it can be minor or serious.
xxR
2007-02-13 11:39:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is important because if the jury knew what a lowlife they were dealing with they might not pretend that they didn't do the crime. Also the crime scene pictures that show what a horrific monster committed some crimes are deemed "prejudicial"
that way only the victim, their family and the police are left to deal with the aftermath of gruesome crimes.
It does seem kind of funny that the exact method of committing a crime, the fact that this person confessed to other crimes, etc. is of no difference to a judge.
If you ever notice on the news they always say "alleged murderer, or rapist" but when the cops are accused of brutality it is always stated as a fact. Interesting....
Our system of "justice" is generally for sale nowadays so bring your money and get away with crimes.
2007-02-13 11:44:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by Lt. Dan reborn 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes it is right for the judge to withhold past convictions...the accused is on trial for one specific crime, not past offenses.
2007-02-13 11:38:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Michael E 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Any person who has been issued an order by the court and fails or neglects to obey such an order, is considered in contempt of court.
2007-02-13 11:51:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Çåŗőľîņẫ§ħŷġĭ®ł 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
speaking when asked not to.
if judges did not withold previous on the defendent then the jury would take that into consideration when deciding if the defendent was guilty.
2007-02-13 11:46:38
·
answer #9
·
answered by phelps 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Some of the things you read about judges and etc makes you wonder why you can get done for it.
2007-02-13 19:07:07
·
answer #10
·
answered by mr bump 3
·
0⤊
0⤋