COM 557 Reading Guide Questions for January 29 - Irwin Mallin, IPFW Communication

Go to Reading Guides | Go to Syllabus | Go to Course Schedule
Go to Assignments | Go to Irwin's Main Page | E-Mail Irwin

COM 557, Spring 2008 – Reading Guide Questions for January 29

For Scheutz Ch. 2

GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES

1. So what’s the difference between a constitutional provision and a statute? Between civil and criminal laws? Between trial and appellate courts?

2. Who gets to appeal trial court decisions in a civil case? In a criminal case?

SPECIFIC LEGAL PRINCIPLES

1. How does a criminal case start? What happens from there?

2. How does a civil case start? What happens from there?

3. What are the alternatives to trial in a criminal case? In a civil case?

4. Explain in you own words the different standards of proof in civil v. criminal cases. What is the rationale for this distinction?

PROCEDURAL RULES

1. How well do you think the provisions of the Sheppard v. Maxwell decision balance free press rights v. fair trial rights?

2. Do cameras in a courtroom help or hurt the trial process? How?

3. What is the rationale for the jury selection procedures she identifies? Do you think this system works as well as it should?

4. How do the steps for deliberation Hastie, Penrod and Pennington compare to the steps you take when evaluating a case you’re reading about or watching a TV news story about? How do they compare to the group decision making processes you’ve read about in other classes?

5. What is the rationale for the recent jury system innovations she identifies? What do you think of them?

6. Given what you’ve learned in your other COM classes, where do you stand in the debate on the importance of opening statements? On the procedures for opening statements?

7. What’s the basic distinction between direct and cross examination? Between the procedures for each? Do they make sense in light of what you’ve learned in other classes?

8. Do the procedures for using evidence (bases for making objections) she identifies make sense in light of what you’ve learned in other classes?

9. Given what you’ve learned in your other COM classes, do the procedures for summations (closing arguments) she identifies make sense to you?

10. What is the procedure for conducting an appeal?

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

1. As a COM student and as an ethical person (those are two independent things) do the professional conduct rules she lists make sense to you?

PROTOCOL

1. What is the rationale for the protocols of court she identifies?

2. For those of you who have studied semiotics and/or ethnography, how might you use those areas of inquiry to explain these protocols?

Go to Reading Guides | Go to Syllabus | Go to Course Schedule
Go to Assignments | Go to Irwin's Main Page | E-Mail Irwin