q2K BHP
Black History Portal
THE BHP WIRE —
HIDDEN TRUTHS
What's New!
THE JOURNEY THROUGH TIME

Explore Black History

Explore the people, places, events, achievements, struggles and stories that shaped our journey.

✊🏾

Civil Rights

Movements, leaders, victories and the continuing fight for equality.

⚙️

Black Inventors

Innovation, patents, science, technology and world-changing contributions.

🏆

Sports

Pioneers, champions, Negro Leagues, records, activism and excellence.

♟️

People

Meet the people whose lives, choices and achievements shaped the journey.

📍

Places

Black towns, communities, institutions and places where history happened.

📜

Events

Moments that changed communities, movements, institutions and the nation.

Enter a person, place, event, or topic.
MY'STORY

The MOVE Fire

This is a personal recollection on the Move fire on May 13, 1985 Philadelphia police fired thousands of rounds at the MOVE house, city officials approved dropping an explosive device on the roof, the resulting fire was allowed to burn, 11 people—including five children—died, and 61 homes were destroyed. Philadelphia City Council later called it a “brutal attack carried out by the City of Philadelphia on its own citizens” and acknowledged that no individual faced criminal consequences for the bombing. One timeline correction worth preserving for the BHP record: the major previous MOVE-police confrontation was August 8, 1978, about seven years before the bombing, not a year or two earlier. Officer James Ramp was killed, other police and firefighters were wounded, nine MOVE members were later convicted, and television cameras recorded police beating Delbert Africa during his arrest. The 1985 MOVE Commission later specifically criticized city planners for failing to adequately use lessons from that 1978 confrontation. And that actually strengthens the point you’re making: 1985 did not happen without precedent or institutional memory. There had already been a deadly confrontation with MOVE, years of conflict, negotiations and police involvement before Osage Avenue.

MORE →
BLACK FACTS
The Truths They Never Taught You...

The Violence That Helped Spark the NAACP

In August 1908, a white mob attacked Springfield, Illinois’s Black community, destroying homes and businesses and lynching two Black men. National outrage over the violence helped spur the movement that created the NAACP the following year.

MORE →
BHP gathered finds from its connected research sources. Showing the 4 strongest Black History matches.
← BACK TO RESULTS
Wikipedia

Trial

Trial of Jean II, Duke of Alençon, October 1458

In law, a trial is a coming together of parties to a dispute, to present information (in the form of evidence) in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. One form of tribunal is a court. The tribunal, which may occur before a judge, jury, or other designated trier of fact, aims to achieve a resolution to their dispute.[1]

Types by finder of fact

[edit]

Where the trial is held before a group of members of the community, it is called a jury trial. Where the trial is held solely before a judge, it is called a bench trial.[2] Hearings before administrative bodies may have many of the features of a trial before a court, but are typically not referred to as trials. An appeal (appellate proceeding) is also generally not deemed a trial, because such proceedings are usually restricted to a review of the evidence presented before the trial court, and do not permit the introduction of new evidence.

Types by dispute

[edit]

Criminal

[edit]
The Old Bailey in London, 1808

A criminal trial is designed to resolve accusations brought (usually by a government) against a person accused of a crime. In common law systems, most criminal defendants are entitled to a trial held before a jury. Because the state is attempting to use its power to deprive the accused of life, liberty, or property, the rights of the accused afforded to criminal defendants are typically broad. The rules of criminal procedure provide rules for criminal trials.

Civil

[edit]

A civil trial is generally held to settle lawsuits or civil claims—non-criminal disputes. In some countries, the government can both sue and be sued in a civil capacity. The rules of civil procedure provide rules for civil trials.

Administrative

[edit]

Although administrative hearings are not ordinarily considered trials, they retain many elements found in more "formal" trial settings. When the dispute goes to a judicial setting, it is called an administrative trial, to revise the administrative hearing, depending on the jurisdiction. The types of disputes handled in these hearings are governed by administrative law and auxiliarily by civil trial law.

Labor

[edit]

Labor law (also known as employment law) is the body of laws, administrative rulings, and precedents which address the legal rights of, and restrictions on, working people and their organizations. Collective labour law relates to the tripartite relationship between employee, employer, and union. Individual labour law concerns employees' rights at work also through the contract for work. Employment standards are social norms (in some cases also technical standards) for the minimum socially acceptable conditions under which employees or contractors are allowed to work. Government agencies (such as the former US Employment Standards Administration) enforce labour law (legislature, regulatory, or judicial).

Systems

[edit]

Adversarial

[edit]

In common law systems, an adversarial or accusatory approach is used to adjudicate guilt or innocence. The assumption is that the truth is more likely to emerge from the open contest between the prosecution and the defense in presenting the evidence and opposing legal arguments, with a judge acting as a neutral referee and as the arbiter of the law. In several jurisdictions in more serious cases, there is a jury to determine the facts, although some common law jurisdictions have abolished the jury trial. This polarizes the issues, with each competitor acting in its own self-interest, and so presenting the facts and interpretations of the law in a deliberately biased way.

The intention is that through a process of argument and counter-argument, examination-in-chief and cross-examination, each side will test the truthfulness, relevancy, and sufficiency of the opponent's evidence and arguments. To maintain fairness, there is a presumption of innocence, and the burden of proof lies on the prosecution. Critics of the system argue that the desire to win is more important than the search for truth. Further, the results are likely to be affected by structural inequalities. Those defendants with resources can afford to hire the best lawyers. Some trials are—or were—of a more summary nature, as certain questions of evidence were taken as resolved (see handhabend and backberend).[3][4][5]

Inquisitorial

[edit]
The Trial of the 66 in Le Monde illustré of 27 January 1883, under the French inquisitorial system

In civil law legal systems, the responsibility for supervising the investigation by the police into whether a crime has been committed falls on an examining magistrate or judge who then conducts the trial. The assumption is that the truth is more likely to emerge from an impartial and exhaustive investigation, both before and during the trial itself. The examining magistrate or judge acts as an inquisitor who directs the fact-gathering process by questioning witnesses, interrogating the suspect, and collecting other evidence.

The lawyers who represent the interests of the state and the accused have a limited role to offer legal arguments and alternative interpretations to the facts that emerge during the process. All the interested parties are expected to cooperate in the investigation by answering the magistrate or judge's questions and, when asked, supplying all relevant evidence. The trial only takes place after all the evidence has been collected and the investigation is completed. Thus, most of the factual uncertainties will already be resolved, and the examining magistrate or judge will already have resolved that there is prima facie of guilt.

Critics argue that the examining magistrate or judge has too much power with the responsibilities of both investigating and adjudicating on the merits of the case. Although lay assessors do sit as a form of jury to offer advice to the magistrate or judge at the conclusion of the trial, their role is subordinate. Further, because a professional has been in charge of all aspects of the case to the conclusion of the trial, there are fewer opportunities to appeal the conviction alleging some procedural error.[6]

Mistrials

[edit]

A judge may cancel a trial prior to the return of a verdict; legal parlance designates this as a "mistrial". A judge may declare a mistrial due to:

  • The court determining that it lacks jurisdiction over a case.
  • Evidence being admitted improperly, or new evidence that might seriously affect the outcome of the trial being discovered.
  • Misconduct by a party, juror,[7] or an outside actor, if it prevents due process.
  • A hung jury which cannot reach a verdict with the required degree of unanimity. In a criminal trial, if the jury is able to reach a verdict on some charges but not others, the defendant may be retried on the charges that led to the deadlock, at the discretion of the prosecution.
  • Disqualification of a juror after the jury is empaneled, if no alternative juror is available and the litigants do not agree to proceed with the remaining jurors, or the remaining jurors not meeting the required number for a trial.
  • The illness or death of a juror or attorney.

Either side may submit a motion for a mistrial; on occasion, the presiding judge may declare one on a motion of their own. If a mistrial is declared, the case at hand may be retried at the discretion of the plaintiff or prosecution, as long as double jeopardy does not bar that party from doing so.

Other types

[edit]

Some other kinds of processes for resolving conflicts are also expressed as trials. For example, the United States Constitution requires that, following the impeachment of the president, a judge, or another federal officer by the House of Representatives, the subject of the impeachment may only be removed from office by an impeachment trial in the Senate, a practice which evolved from the British parliament's powers of impeachment, wherein the House of Lords would also try public officials. In earlier times, disputes were often settled through a trial by ordeal, where parties would have to endure physical suffering in order to prove their righteousness; or through a trial by combat, in which the winner of a physical fight was deemed righteous in their cause.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Schultz, Norman. Fact-Finding. Accessed 17 November 2008
  2. ^ Black, Henry Campbell (1990). Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing. pp. 156. ISBN 0-314-76271-X.
  3. ^ Hale, Sandra Beatriz (July 2004). The Discourse of Court Interpreting: Discourse Practices of the Law, the Witness and the Interpreter. John Benjamins. p. 31. ISBN 978-1-58811-517-1.
  4. ^ Richards, Edward P.; Katharine C. Rathbun (1999-08-15). Medical Care Law. Jones & Bartlett. p. 6. ISBN 978-0-8342-1603-7.
  5. ^ Care, Jennifer Corrin (2004-01-12). Civil Procedure and Courts in the South Pacific. Routledge Cavendish. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-85941-719-5.
  6. ^ See:
  7. ^ St. Eve, Amy J.; Zuckerman, Michael A. (2012). "Ensuring an Impartial Jury in the Age of Social Media" (PDF). Duke Law & Technology Review. 11. Archived from the original (PDF) on Aug 9, 2017.
[edit]

Source: Wikipedia. Article content is retrieved live through the MediaWiki API.

Wikipedia

Trial

In law, a trial is a coming together of parties to a dispute, to present information (in the form of evidence) in a tribunal, a formal setting with the authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. One form of tribunal is a court. The tribunal, which may occur before a judge, jury, or other designated trier of fact, aims to achieve a resolution to their dispute.

MORE →
Wikipedia

The Trial

The Trial (German: Der Prozess) is a German-language novel written by the German speaking Czech-Jewish writer Franz Kafka in 1914 and 1915 and published posthumously on 26 April 1925. One of his best-known works, it tells the story of Josef K., a bank official arrested and prosecuted by an inaccessible authority, with the nature of the crime of which he is accused revealed neither to him nor to the reader. The novel shows K. as he tries to navigate through an absurdly bureaucratic legal system as well as his social alienation as he attempts to clear his name. Some similarities between The Trial and Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment and The Brothers Karamazov suggest their possible influence on it, and Kafka went so far as to call Dostoevsky a blood relative. Like Kafka's two other novels, The Castle and Amerika, The Trial was never completed, although it does include a chapter that appears to bring the story to an intentionally abrupt ending. After Kafka's death in 1924, his friend and literary executor Max Brod edited the text for publication by Verlag Die Schmiede. The original manuscript is held at the Museum of Modern Literature, Marbach am Neckar, Germany. The first English-language translation, by Willa and Edwin Muir, was published in 1937. In 1999, the book was listed in Le Monde's 100 Books of the Century and as No. 2 of the Best German Novels of the Twentieth Century.

MORE →
Wikipedia

Scopes trial

The State of Tennessee v. John Thomas Scopes, also known as the Scopes Monkey Trial, was an American legal case from July 10 to July 21, 1925, in which a high school teacher, John T. Scopes, was accused of violating the Butler Act, a Tennessee state law which outlawed the teaching of human evolution in public schools. The trial was deliberately staged in order to attract publicity to the small town of Dayton, Tennessee, where it was held. Scopes was unsure whether he had ever actually taught evolution, but he incriminated himself deliberately so the case could have a defendant. Scopes was represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, which had offered to defend anyone accused of violating the Butler Act in an effort to challenge the constitutionality of the law. Scopes was found guilty and was fined $100 (equivalent to $1908 in 2026), but the verdict was overturned on a technicality. William Jennings Bryan, a three-time presidential candidate and former secretary of state, argued for the prosecution, while famed labor and criminal lawyer Clarence Darrow served as the principal defense attorney for Scopes. The trial publicized the fundamentalist–modernist controversy, which set modernists, who believed evolution could be consistent with religion, against fundamentalists, who believed the word of God as revealed in the Bible took priority over all human knowledge. The case was thus seen both as a theological contest and as a trial on whether evolution should be taught in schools. The trial became a symbol of the larger social anxieties associated with the cultural changes and modernization that characterized the 1920s in the United States. It also served its purpose of drawing intense national publicity and highlighted the growing influence of mass media, having been covered by news outlets around the country and being the first trial in American history to be nationally broadcast by radio.

MORE →
Wikipedia

Bernoulli trial

In the theory of probability and statistics, a Bernoulli trial (or binomial trial) is a random experiment with exactly two possible outcomes, "success" and "failure". It is named after Jacob Bernoulli, a 17th-century Swiss mathematician, who analyzed them in his Ars Conjectandi (1713). The mathematical formalization and advanced formulation of the Bernoulli trial is known as the Bernoulli process. Since a Bernoulli trial has only two possible outcomes, it can be framed as a "yes or no" question. For example: Is the top card of a shuffled deck an ace? Was the newborn child a girl? (See human sex ratio.) Success and failure are in this context labels for the two outcomes, and should not be construed literally or as value judgments. More generally, given any probability space, for any event (set of outcomes), one can define a Bernoulli trial according to whether the event occurred or not (event or complementary event). Examples of Bernoulli trials include: Flipping a coin. In this context, obverse ("heads") conventionally denotes success and reverse ("tails") denotes failure. A fair coin has the probability of success 0.5 by definition. In this case, there are exactly two possible outcomes. Rolling a die, where a six is "success" and everything else a "failure". In this case, there are six possible outcomes, and the event is a six; the complementary event "not a six" corresponds to the other five possible outcomes. In conducting a political opinion poll, choosing a voter at random to ascertain whether that voter will vote "yes" in an upcoming referendum.

MORE →
TOPIC OF THE DAY

Greenwood / Black Wall Street

Before the 1921 destruction of Tulsa’s Greenwood District, Black residents had created a remarkable center of business and community life. The district included stores, professional offices, entertainment venues and homes owned by Black citizens. Understanding Greenwood means learning what was built—not only what was burned.

MORE →
TRIVIA QUESTION OF THE DAY

Who was the first African-American woman millionaire in the United States?

Madam C.J. Walker