Civilisation américaine

The Gilded Age (end of the 19th century)
→ Spread of industry, the Robber Barons took advantage of the immigrants.
People could cross the country with the railroad system.

A lot of social changes: the working week went from 60 hours to 50 hours a week. People were looking for leisure activities: cinemas, sports, theaters, baseball, parks, radio etc… New fashions (with the sewing machine). People were becoming standardized.
Many questions arose about morality, about behavior.
→ What did it mean to be a good American? Someone who was hygienically clean. Public schools helped make Americans: they were free and all states passed laws to make schools compulsory. A lot of kids were speaking their native language at home but they learned English at school. At that time, the English language was the key to success in America, that’s what the government was promoting and what the people knew.
Universities like Harvard and Yale wouldn’t accept immigrants. A lot of new universities were built and the system of education was changed. It became accessible to women and to black men.
A lot of this was thanks to the donations of the Rubber Barons. Women’s colleges.
Universities for and by African Americans.

The US faced a lot of political and social changes. It led to politics that had a hands-off approach. A lot of big businessmen controlled a lot of politics.
During the Gilded Age, the Republicans controlled the Northern cities.
Democrats included the urban factory workers, immigrants, labors, southern planters, western farmers, the poor and underprivileged. They claimed to be for the common man, they said they would raise the farmers’ salaries and they also were proponents of using silver to control the currency instead of gold. They were against the blue laws (that prohibited certain behavior, like the drinking of alcohol on Sundays).
Politicians needed every single vote they could so they avoided taking strong stances on any topic because they didn’t want to offend anyone.
James Garfield was elected president but he was assassinated in 1881. Chester Arthur stepped in as President and made a lot of progress in performing the spoils system. He gave voters jobs.

Grover Cleveland was elected in 1885 (democrat).
Benjamin Harrison elected in 1889 (republican).
William McKinley elected in 1897.

America developed extremely rapidly in the last two decades of the 19th century. At that time 93% voted.
Many of the issues of the industrialization or poverty were not touched by politicians, it was too risky.

The 1890s began with an economic crisis because of investment and over speculation.

Grover Cleveland was elected in 1893 (democrat) before and after Harrison. He was faced with overseas countries that needed gold and silver backup. GB had a lot of economic problems and when British investors had problems in Britain, they went to the States; they wanted their gold.
It depleted the gold reserve in the US; it went to Britain.
The US was also spending a lot of money in pensions and on different construction projects. At the end of 1893, gold was dangerously low and many banks and businesses failed.
The industrial unemployment level had reached as much 25%. People were starving, even in the big cities like NY. It was a difficult time and this created a huge labor unrest → two problems dealing with nativism: movement to restrict immigration.
The rule farmers were working even harder. The industry ad the monopoly on railroad, shipping, steel, factories… Farmers were caught in a web of inflated prices. Even before the crises, a lot of farmers got together and created granges. These are similar with unions. There were radicals, reformers. They formed a group called the Populists. They were the working-class, the backbone of America. They were tired of having to go by business rules. They gained a lot of political plot.
(Mary Elizabeth Lease said: “What you farmers need is to raise less corn and more hell.”)
They had so many members that they made a lot of pressure on both political parties.

William McKinley 1896 (Republican): he tried to reform public business. His measures were successful, the country regained a little bit of stability and he was reelected in 1900.
The depression was thus memorable for the lessons it taught.
A lot of middle-class charitable workers realized that sober people can also succumb to a society’s economic depression and good people get in situations they can’t control. As the social work profession grew, its members spent less and less time preaching to the poor and more time investigating the reasons why people were poor: reorientation on how people thought about poverty.
There were also social transformations that changed the face of America. Education was the key to success. Government realized it was the 1st step to economic and social success.
By the 1900s, around 60% of American children were enrolled in free public schools. This is how they turned immigrants into Americans: this is the Americanization in teaching them with cleanliness thrift, patriotism and hard work. A good American was a patriot.
A lot of colleges were built for women and blacks. Some universities were forced to admit black men and women. They wanted to break free from a lot of Victorian codes of conduct. Women wanted the right to vote, equal pay and they wanted to own and control their own property. They also wanted access to higher quality jobs and they wanted to be protected from domestic violence. They did progress.
Booker T. Washington and W. E. B. Dubois were pillars in the black community. Booker T. Washington helped having access to education. WEB Dubois graduated from Harvard with PHD.
1890: 160 black Afrian Americans were attending US universities.
1900: over 600 thousand (or 6,000?) had graduated.

Even after the passage of the 13th and 14th Amendments, they were still discriminated. In Northern states, people were worried the impact the blacks would have.
They wanted to vote so they decided that voters should be landowners. They also charged a fee. A lot of people were not landowners. There was also a literacy test to prove they could write, which excluded a lot of African Americans, as well as whites. Grandfather clauses: if you had relatives who could vote before the Civil War, then you could vote.
Jim Crowe Laws were associated with the Southerners sates but they first appeared in Massachusetts in the 1830s: fear of sexual contact between black men and white women and the fear that things would change for white people. In order to keep blacks in their places, the terror of lynching was rampant.

Droit pénal 24.01.12

Section I. Présentation générale du droit pénal.

Pas de définition précise.

→ Ensemble des règles juridiques qui organisent la réaction de l'Etat vis à vis des infractions et des délinquants.

Trois fonctions principales :

• Déterminer les actes qu'on doit considérer comme anti-sociaux.
• Déterminer les personnes déclarées comme responsables de ces actes.
• Déterminer les sanctions, les peines applicables à l'encontre de ces personnes.

1. La détermination de la nature du droit pénal.

C'est une matière mixte car elle est une sorte d'intermédiaire entre le droit privé d'une part et le droit public d'autre part. Elle empreinte au droit privé certain de ses caractères : le droit pénal protège des droits subjectifs, comme le droit privé. En revanche, on peut le rattacher au droit public car il régit des personnes privées et l'Etat. De plus, il dispose d'une certaine autonomie tant par rapport au droit privé qu'au droit public, car on rencontre dans cette matière des concepts juridiques qui n'existent ni en droit public, ni en droit privés. Par exemple, la notion de complicité n'existe qu'en droit pénal. Il en va de même pour la notion de tentative.

2. La détermination des branches du droit pénal.

Le droit pénal 'est un terme générique qui est synonyme de droit criminel, et qui renvoie à différentes sous-catégories, à différentes disciplines. Le droit pénal est donc un contenant, une notion cadre, avec un contenu très riche. On distingue dans ce contenu quatre aspects différents :

• Le droit pénal général, matière regroupant toutes les règles générales applicables à toutes infractions quelles qu'elles soient.
• Le droit pénal spécial : ensemble des infractions en vigueur ; ensemble des comportements dont la réalisation est assortie d'une sanction. C'est un catalogue d'infractions. On peut diviser ce catalogue en deux branches différents :
  → le droit spécial commun : toutes les infractions comprises dans le code pénal.
  → le droit spécial technique : ensemble des règles trouvées en dehors du code pénal, dissimilée dans d'autres codes ou des infractions qu'on ne trouve qu'au sein de certaines lois. C'est tout ce que le législateur n'a pas été capable de structurer, de codifier.
  La majeure partie des infractions sont néanmoins codifiées dans le Code pénal, appelé le Nouveau Code pénal.
• La procédure pénale. C'est l'ensemble des règles relatives à la recherche, à la poursuite, et au jugement des auteurs d'infractions. On ne cherche plus à savoir ce qui est interdit, ce qui ne l'est pas ou encore la sanction est applicable, mais préciser tous les droits et toutes les obligations en matière de recherche ou de jugement des auteurs de l'infractions. Ex : que peut/doit faire un juge d'instruction en matière pénal ? / Contexte de flagrant délit (compétence augmentées). Le droit pénal est dit contentieux, la mise en œuvre nécessite obligatoirement une autorité judiciaire. Seules les autorités judiciaires peuvent prononcer la sanction.
• Les sciences criminelles. On trouve d'une part les sciences criminalistiques, celles qui étudient l'infractions qui été commise ; en analysant l'acte criminel et les traces qu'il a pu laisser. On y trouve par exemple la balistique, la médecine légale (autopsies...), recherche d'ADN. Ces recherches sont effectuées dans des laboratoires spécialisés. On trouve d'autre part les sciences criminologiques. On ne s'intéresse non plus à l'acte criminel mais à l'auteur de cet acte, l'auteur de l'infraction. Ces sciences nous permettent de déterminer la personnalité du délinquant (étude du mécanisme du passage à l'acte). Trois courants se sont intéressés à ce mécanisme :
  → courant médical, anthropologie criminelle (portrait du criminel né). Cela consisterait à dire par exemple que les causes de la délinquance peuvent se trouver dans l'ADN.
  → courant sociologique. Il étudie les causes sociales de la délinquance. Le milieu social a en effet une grande part de responsabilité.
  → courant psychologique. Il étudie la délinquance dite pathologique (cleptomanie, pyromanie...).

3. La détermination des finalités du droit pénal.

On trouve quatre grandes finalités :

• La fonction expressive. Le droit pénal exprime des valeurs auxquelles nous sommes attachés ; les valeurs que l'on souhaite préserver contre toute atteinte. Toute infraction, quelle qu'elle soit, porte atteinte à une valeur sociale. Le meurtre est interdit car le droit pénal préserve la valeur sociale de la vie humaine par exemple.
• La fonction pédagogique. Le droit pénal est là pour apprendre aux citoyens comment se comporter, c'est un guide qui donne des ordres.
• La fonction préventive. Le législateur espère qu'en assortissant d'une sanction la transgression de l'interdit, il parviendra à dissuader toute personne de transgresser cet interdit.
• La fonction répressive. C'est la fonction la plus ancienne du droit pénal, c'est aussi la plus connue. Elle consiste à infliger une peine à celui qui n'a pas respecté l'interdit. Cela signifie aussi l'échec des trois fonctions précédentes. On n'a pas réussi à faire comprendre, à dissuader. Pourtant la réussite du droit pénal passe essentiellement dans les deux premières fonctions (or, en France, la répression est prédominante, il n'y a pas assez dé prévention).

Section II. Les écoles de pensées en matière pénale.

Il y a cinq courants de pensée.

1. L'école de la justice absolue.

Créée par Kant (1724-1804) qui associe de manière indissociable le droit pénal aux notions de morale et d’éthique. Il a une vision purement répressive du droit pénal qui devrait se contenter d’engendrer des peines. Pour lui, la sanction est uns souffrance endurée par la personne condamnée qui lui permet d’expier sa faute et prendre un nouveau départ dans la société.
Conception qui est aujourd’hui complètement dépassée. La seule vision répressive du droit pénal engendre un échec.

2. Les écoles classique et néo-classique.

A. L'école classique.

Menée par Beccaria (1738-1794). dénonce le système de l'Ancien Régime et de ses déviances causées par le pouvoir arbitraire des juges. Il faut réduire le pouvoir accordé aux juges, en partant du principe que le juge ne doit pas avoir un pouvoir de création de droit, il ne fait que l'appliquer. Ce qui caractérise Beccaria, c'est la volonté d'instaurer le syllogisme judiciaire (ensemble constitué de deux parties : une majeure -action du législateur qui définit le comportement délictueux et qui assortit sa réalisation d'une sanction- et une mineure -comportement concret réalisé par un délinquant-). Pour Beccaria, le système judiciaire est simple : soit le juge constate que la mineure correspond exactement à la majeure et applique la sanction adéquate, soit au contraire le juge constate que la mineure ne correspond pas à la majeure et donc il ne peut pas condamner. Il n'a pas de pouvoir d'appréciation. Beccaria est à l'origine de cinq principes qui constituent aujourd'hui les piliers du droit pénal français :

• Le principe de la légalité criminelles. Seul le législateur peut générer des infractions et des sanctions à l'encontre des délinquants.
• Le principe de l'interprétation stricte de la loi pénale. Le juge ne peut pas interpréter la loi, il doit l'appliquer en l'état. Il ne peut pas étendre son champs d'application à un autre cas.
• Le principe de la non rétroactivité de la loi pénale. On ne peut pas appliquer une infraction à des faits commis à l'époque où l'infraction n'était pas en vigueur.
• Les principes d'utilité et de proportionnalité. La peine ne doit pas avoir une fonction uniquement punitive (détachement de la conception de Kant). Elle doit être préventive. Il y a une notion d'utilitarisme (que l'on doit à Jeremy Bentham) ; De plus, la sanction doit être mesurée en fonction de l'infraction.

B. L'école néo-classique.

Menée par Saleilles. Prise en compte du positivisme et des sciences. On ne s'intéresse plus seulement à l'acte criminel mais aussi à son auteur, à sa personnalité, son passé, sa motivation etc. on met au cœur du système pénal le délinquant lui-même. Le juge doit disposer d'une certaine appréciation. Cela conduit au principe d'individualisation de la peine. Cette peine doit être adaptée à chacun, elle doit devenir un outils de réinsertion et non plus seulement un outils répressif.

Ces deux écoles, dont les principes sont ancrés dans notre droit pénal actuel, ont séduit les révolutionnaires de 1789.

3. L'école positiviste.

Cette école s'est développée en Italie, avec Lombroso (médecin), Feri (professeur de droit) et Bara Folo (magistrat).

A. Délinquance et absence de libre arbitre.

Pour ses auteurs, le délinquant est dépourvu de libre arbitre, car, pour ses auteurs, le comportement de ces auteurs est déterminé à l'avance. Certaines personnes sont prédestinées à devenir criminels, sans l'avoir choisi. En conséquence, ils sont considérés comme irresponsables, puisqu'ils n'ont pas choisi. Il y a deux catégories de facteurs :

• Les facteurs endogènes. Cause interne à l'individu. On se base sur des données chromosomiques, morphologiques ou des données biologiques. Lombroso est le père de l'anthropologie criminelle. Il s'est appuyé sur des études pour établir le portrait du « criminel né ». Ce courant a été abandonné pour manque de sérieux.
• Les facteurs exogènes. Cause extérieur à l'individu. On se base sur l'ordre social, politique ou économique dans lequel évolue l'individu. On prend en compte le contexte professionnel, l'enfance etc.
  Il y a cinq catégories de délinquant :
  → Le criminel né.
  → Le criminel aliéné. Il devient criminel à la suite d'un trouble mental.
  → Le criminel d'habitude.
  → Le criminel d'occasion.
  → Le criminel passionnel.

B. Droit pénal et protection de la société.

On trouve ce postulat dans l'objectif qu'ils (les positivistes) reconnaissent au droit pénal. Pour les positivistes, il est inutile d'infliger une peine au délinquant parce qu'ils sont irresponsables. Ainsi, dans l'école positiviste, la notion de peine est inexistante. Vont être mises en place des mesures de protections sociales. Ces mesures peuvent être classées en deux catégories :

• Les mesures préventives sont prises avant même que l'infraction ne soit commise et ont pour but de prévenir les causes exogènes. Ex : lutter contre l'alcoolisme ; construire des écoles pour favoriser l'éducation ; destruction des taudis.
• Les mesures postérieures. Ce sont des mesures de sûreté, qui n'ont pas pour fonction de punir le délinquant mais de protéger la société de ses agissements. Il y a pour ça trois types de mesures de sûreté :
  → des mesures réparatrices (réparer le dommage causé, sous forme par ex de dommages et intérêt).
  → des mesures éliminatrices (ex : la peine de mort, qui n'a pas pour fonction de punir le délinquant mais de l'exclure de la société).
  → des mesures dites répressives (incohérentes avec leur point de départ, puisque leur but n'est pas de réprimer). Ex : l'amande.
  Il est proposé d'appliquer ces mesures non pas en fonction de la gravité de l'acte mais en fonction de l'individu. Par exemple, un meurtre commis par un individu en état d'ébriété ne sera pas sanctionné car c'est un criminel occasionnel, tandis qu'un « criminel né » qui vole une bicyclette sera sanctionné.

Néanmoins, cette école a permis de développer les notions de circonstances atténuantes ou aggravantes, ainsi que les peines complémentaires (ex : confiscation d'un bien à l'origine de l'infraction).

4. Les écoles de défense sociale.

On trouve un auteur belge, Prins qui a permis de généré deux écoles de pensée, appelées école de défense sociale :

• Défense sociale originaire. Elle est associée à l'auteur italien Grammatica. Il est proche de la pensée positiviste, il nie la notion de libre arbitre. En revanche, il ne nie pas le concept de responsabilité. Il part de l'idée que l'homme est au départ poussé à devenir criminel, il n'a pas de libre arbitre. Cependant, la société va l'aider à se responsabilité et à fuir cette prédétermination qui pèse sur lui.
• Défense sociale nouvelle. Cette école est plus sérieuse. Elle a été portée par Ancel. Elle repose sur quatre points :
  → Elle maintient le cadre pénal, la notion d'infraction.
  → Elle prend en compte les développement scientifiques nouveaux. C'est une approche pluridisciplinaire.
  → On élabore une pédagogie de la responsabilité adaptée à chaque délinquant. Attention, ce n'est pas de l'individualisation.
  → Elle renforce les garanties procédurales, notamment le droit de la défense.

Néanmoins, cette école n'apporte pas grand chose de nouveau. Elle a en revanche développé les peines de substitutions à l'emprisonnement.

5. Les écoles abolitionnistes.

Elle a été développée entre autres par Versele et Hulsmann. Ils prônent une suppression du droit pénal pour certaines infractions. Ils ne parlent d'ailleurs plus d'infractions mais de situations problématiques. Ils répondent à ces situations par ce qui est appelé des paraboles de l'étudiant. Cinq étudiants colocataires partagent un appartement. L'un d'entre eux casse volontairement la télévision et fait naitre une situation problématique. Chacun des quatre autres colocataires va appréhender la situation différemment. Le premier demande l'exclusion de l'auteur. Il se réfère donc à la fonction punitive du droit pénal. Le second propose qu'il achète une nouvelle télévision ; fonction réparatrice. Le troisième considère qu'il est fou et qu'il doit consulter un médecin ; réponse médicale à la situation problématique. Le quatrième propose que tout le monde discute ensemble du problème pour parvenir à trouver une solution ; on retrouve là la médiation. Face à une situation problématique, la réponse punitive n'est pas forcément la meilleure solution. L'influence de cette conception n'est pas innovatrice, rien de nouveau n'est apporté.

Leçon I. L'infraction.

Elle renvoie à deux notions. Juridiquement, on parle d'infraction pour viser le comportement que le législateur souhaite prohiber et dont il assortit d'une peine la réalisation.

Article 331-1 du Code pénal: « Le vol est la soustraction frauduleuse de la chose d'autrui. »

Article 311-3 du Code pénal: « Il est puni de 3 ans d'emprisonnement et de 45000 euros d'amande. »

Le premier article vise la première composante et le second article vise la seconde composante.

Pour qu'il y ait une infraction, il faut trois conditions cumulatives :

• Deux composantes majeures de l'infraction :
  → L'élément légal (texte de loi qui décrit le comportement interdit et la sanction) d'une part
  → L'élément matériel (description précise du comportement interdit ; pas la sanction) d'autre part.
• L'élément moral.

Titre I. L'élément légal de l'infraction.

Chapitre I. L'existence de l'infractions.

Principe de la légalité des peines. Il faut nécessairement l'existence d'un texte de loi pour incriminer un comportement et catégoriser les infractions.

Section I. Le principe de légalité des délits et des peines.

Chapitre II. L'interprétation de la loi pénale.

Chapitre III. Application de la loi pénale dans le temps et l'espace.

Droit institutionnel de l'UE 24.01.12

Bibliographie :

• Blumann et Dubouis : « Droit institutionnel de l'Union Européenne »
• Jacque : « Droit institutionnel de l'Union Européenne » Dalloz
• Pertek : « Droit des institutions de l'Union Européenne »
• Isaac : « Droit général du droit communautaire »
• Rideau : « Droit institutionnel de l'Union Européenne »
• Mehdi : « Droit institutionnel de l'Union Européenne » Hachette

Revues :

• Revue Trimestrielle Droit Européenne
• Revue du Marché Commun et de l'Union Européenne
• Jurisclasseur Europe.

• Journal Officiel de l'Union Européenne (série législation & série communication)
• Grands Arrêts de la Jurisprudence de la Cour de Justice de l'Union Européenne
• Grands Textes de droit communautaire. Dalloz

Internet :

• europa.eu.int
• curia.eu.int
• europarl.eu.int
• ue.ec.int

Titre I. La construction historique de l'Union Européenne.

Chapitre I. La mise en place des communautés.

Chapitre II. L'évolution des communautés vers l'Union Européenne.

Chapitre III. L'Union Européenne de nos jours.

Titre II. L'ordre juridique de la communauté.

Chapitre I. Les sources du droit communautaire.

Chapitre II. La hiérarchie des normes.

Titre III. Le système institutionnel.

Chapitre I. Les organes de décisions.

Chapitre II. Les organes de contrôle.

Chapitre III. Les autres organes.

Exposé Pauline, Manon F et Manon B

SUMMARY


I. The designation of the presidential candidates by the political parties

A. The choice of the delegates to the parties' national conventions

    1. The primaries

    2. The caucuses

B. The parties’ national conventions and the choice of the candidate to the presidential election

C.  The electoral campaign


II. The Electoral College's forming and the election of the presidential ticket

A. The election of the presidential electors: participation of political parties and citizens

B. The election of the presidential ticket by the Electoral College


III.  The finance of the electoral system in the frame of the federal elections


A. A legal frame: before and after 1974

B. The actors of the finance

C. A controversial system of finance

INTRODUCTION
The particularity of the United States of America consists in the fact that, contrary to the usual idea we have of  democracy, the President and the Vice-President of the State are elected indirectly. There is an overall of both federal and state laws in the organization of the elections.
The Article II of the United States Constitution  drew the method of presidential election including the role of the citizens and the Electoral College. This article was the result of long negotiations destined to find a compromise between those who wanted the Congress to choose the president and those who preferred a national vote by the citizens.
The held of elections is fixed at intervals that cannot be changed. Whatever the country is in war or in crisis, the calendar of the election will be maintained. That is what ensures the sustainability of the American  electoral system.
The run for presidency is divided in two parts, more precisely in two campaigns: those in the media and those as the formal election. The aim is to seek a leader within the political parties and then to ensure him to gain enough votes to win a majority in order to access to the Electoral College.
So what are the modalities of the actual American electoral system?
We are going to show the complexity of this electoral system in three parts: the designation of the president candidates (I), the  forming of the Electoral College and the election of the President pair (II) and finally the finance of the electoral campaign (III).
I. The designation of the presidential candidates by the political parties

A. The choice of the delegates to the parties’ national conventions

It’s the first stage of the election of the president of the USA. This stage is usually held in the first semester of the election year.
During this period, in each of the 50 States, the delegates to the parties’ national conventions are designated. Each political party elects its delegates in each State of the USA with the system it chose. There are two different systems: either the primary or the caucus.
The number of delegates is decided by the political party.

        1. The primaries
The rules concerning the primaries are varying from State to State and also from political party to political party. Even sometimes, it would differ from one election to another.
Concerning the system used during primaries we can distinguish two major systems.
The first one consists in voters who elect delegates who have indicated a particular candidate they want to vote for.
The second one consists in electing delegates who will be legally bound to vote for the candidate who will have the biggest support in their congressional district.
Concerning the persons allowed to vote at these primaries, we can also distinguish two major systems.
The first one is called the closed primaries system. It consists in allowing only the party members to elect delegates.
The second one is called the open primaries system. This system does not require voters to be official members of the political party that organizes the primary election. This system also knows lots of alternatives. For example, at some open primaries voters have to recognize publically their belonging to the party and to certify on their honor to vote for the future party’s candidate at the federal election.
The system of the primary election is the most used in the USA because it tends to democratize the intern life of political parties. Moreover, this system serves to rank the candidates within one political party and thus to see which on is most likely to win the presidential election.
This system is often used by the two major political parties of the US, which are the Democrat Party and the Republican Party.  However, the rates of participation at these primaries are not very high.

        2. The caucuses
It’s the most complex system of designation of the delegates because it has several levels of election of the delegates.
The first election is done at the level of the precinct. Then the second election is done at the level of the county. After that, a third election is held at the level of the congressional district. Finally, the commission of the congressional district has to choose the delegates who will be going to the party’s national conventions.
Most of the time, in the caucuses, it’s the proportional representation that is used.

B. The parties’ national conventions and the choice of the candidate to the presidential election

Traditionally, those conventions are held by both major parties during the summer and last four days. During these conventions, each party agrees upon their final nominee. However, because of the primary election system, the winner is known before the convention is held.
This is the reason for which we can wonder if those conventions are really needed. In fact, there are three official main points on the agenda of the conventions. In the first place, the party has to adopt its electoral platform. Secondly, it has to adopt the modifications to its own constitution. Last, it has to elect the candidate to the presidential and also the vice-president.
It’s the candidate to the presidency who selects the possible vice-president and the convention has to approve his or her choice. However, the party would try to balance the ticket, meaning balance the duo of the president and of the vice-president, in a geographical, religious and ideological manner.
We have to notice that the electorate is not very interested in these conventions any more. In fact we can see two main reasons at this fact: there is no more suspense in the designation of the candidate to the presidency and the specialized channels that retransmit the conventions are not free. Moreover since 1992, the political observers qualify the conventions of informercials meaning infopub because since the beginning of the television, each second of the conventions are fully regulated.
However the conventions are still useful in the sense that they serve to stimulate the electorate in the perspective of the long electoral campaign of the autumn.

C.  The electoral campaign

From the Labor Day, which takes place on the first Monday of September, to the day prior the election day the candidates cross the country several times to do their campaign. However, they usually dedicate more time to the most densely populated because they are more represented within the Electoral College.
The candidates have different standard speeches for each particular group as for example young women, workers, businessmen or farmers. They repeat the same things during their all campaign but they usually keep time at the end of the afternoon for new things. Indeed, by doing that, they may be able to be on the TV news of the day.
TV plays a major role in the presidential campaign by many ways. First, they retransmit electoral ads of the candidates or of the political parties. Second, since 1976 each campaign has its televised debate. Since 1992, some of these debates are in fact a forum in which candidates answer to the questions of the audience.
In 1987, a commission on presidential debates has been created. It serves to organize the debates and apportion the speaking time between candidates. It also fixes a minimum of speaking time to the third most important candidate.
We have to mention that a president who is also a candidate to the next presidential election has certain advantages over the other candidates. Indeed, as in France, a president can announce popular measures or take decisions that would influence his popularity rating. Moreover, he can enjoy a great cover of the media because of his presidential position.


II. The Electoral College’s forming and the election of the presidential ticket

The USA presidential electoral system is known as one of the most complex in the world. Indeed, there are fifty different electoral laws only for the presidential election.
The President of the United States of America is elected by the indirect universal suffrage through an Electoral College. Each State has as many representatives in the Electoral College as it has in the Congress except. There are 538 Presidential Electors within the Electoral College. 
In consequence, we can say that the President of the United States is elected in two stages: the citizens first vote for the presidential electors who compose the Electoral College. Second, the presidential electors elect the President of the United States.
So, we are going to see first the first stage and then the second stage.


A. The election of the presidential electors: participation of the political parties and citizens


First, we have to talk about the formation of the electoral lists to the Electoral College.
The presidential electors who appear on the electoral lists are recruited by the political party concerned. Most of the time, presidential electors are unknown by the people but have served the party for numerous years. In fact, it’s a way for the party to thanks politically devoted people.

Second, let’s talk about the participation of the citizens to the election of the presidential electors.
In the USA, there are no permanent registers of voters like in France. Indeed, for each election, each citizen has to take the time to register as voter of the State. This registration can be done in public places such as Justice Court. This system has a bad effect on participations rates to the election. In consequence, in 1993 the Congress voted a law called “Motor Voter Law” which aims to increase the registration on electoral registers. For instance, it requires States facilitate the electoral registration in common places such as post offices or via the Internet.  
Moreover, each State has its own requirements to the exercise of the franchise. For instance, some States requires a certain time of living in the concerned State but considering the high mobility of American people this requirement can prevent lots of citizens from voting. In consequence, since 1972, the required period of living in a particular State has been reduced to thirty days for the presidential election.

Finally, we have to talk about the Election Day, which takes place on the first Tuesday following the first Monday of November. This date can be explain by American agrarian history.
At this stage, Americans vote for a fixed list of Presidential Electors mainly choosing between the Democratic and the Republican list. This stage is named “the Popular Vote” whereas the second step is named “The Electoral Vote”.
To determine which candidate has won, the principle of the “winner-take-all” is used. According to this principle, any candidate who wins a majority of electors in a State will collect all the electors of that State. Thus, this principle does not really reflect the voter opinion because sometimes the majority can be very narrow. For example, in 1980 Reagan was elected with 91% of the electoral vote but with only 51% of the popular vote.


B. The election of the presidential ticket by the Electoral College


This consists in the final step of the presidential election. In December, the Presidential Electors meet in Washington to elect the presidential ticket meaning the President and Vice-President.
In 24 States and in the District of Columbia, Presidential Electors are obliged to vote for the candidate who has obtained the more votes in their State. In the 26 other States, Presidential Electors can vote for the candidate they want, even if most of the time they respect the popular vote.
However, sometimes, Presidential Electors don’t take in account the popular vote. It has happened about 12 times since 1789. People who want a change of the type of suffrage or the entire erasing of the Electoral College often take this fact as an argument to their cause.
However, this meeting is mere a formality than a real vote because the results are known thanks to the November election.

On January the 6th, the Senate proceeds to the counting of the votes of the Electoral College. At this stage, if no candidate has obtained the required majority, it would be the Congress that would elect the President and the Vice-President.

The elected President is sworn into office on January 20th of the following year at midday accordingly to the XXth amendment. During the Inauguration ceremony, the President gives his Inaugural Address, which is a speech. Moreover, it takes an oath upon the Bible, which goes like that: “I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States”.



III.  The finance of the electoral system in the frame of the federal elections

The complexity that characterizes the election of a President is not the only issue raised by the US electoral system. In fact, we have to wonder what is the cost to become President of the most powerful state of the world. Many economists, historians and politicians agree to say that money is the biggest problem of the whole political system. That's why, in order to stem corruption during the presidential elections, the American legislator decided to develop a body of rules that frame their finance.

A. A legal frame: before and after 1974

During the 1970's, the American Congress took the huge decision to democratize the finance of all the elections in the United States to avoid embezzlements within the political parties and the caucuses and during the different electoral campaigns. The first step resided in the adoption of the Federal Election Act of 1971 that required candidates to disclose their sources of campaign and campaign expenditures. We must underline that until 1974 there was no limit to the expenses engaged by a candidate who ran for presidency during the primaries or during his campaign. 1974 constituted the turning point of the modalities of the campaign finance. In fact the limitation of campaign contributions banned direct contributing to campaigns by corporations and trades unions and put the boundary of $1, 000 for each individual donation. Moreover the 1974 amendment established a Federal Election Commission which had the mission to administer and enforce campaign finance law.
The following laws of 1976 added further rules to the finance of electoral campaigns and provided that the presidential campaigns will now be financed entirely by public funds whereas the primaries and the parties committees will be financed by private funds and funds of the State. Of course candidates found means to get out of this rules, means which have been partially consecrated by different judgements of the Supreme Court. Thus in 1979 an amendment to the Federal Election allowed political parties to spend without limit on get-out-the-vote and voter registration activities conducted primarily for a presidential candidate. The use of unregulated and unlimited contributions was also permitted to the finance of the electoral system.
A code governing the expenses of the candidates and the sleeping partners was created. But the setting of this code could not prevent the emergence of a phenomenon called “soft money”. The appellation “soft money” defined the money that comes from an individual or an organization and that is not directly invested in the campaign but spent in candidate specific advertising or others efforts. This finance is used to support a candidate but it is not legally coordinated to the official campaign. In opposition the expression “hard money” referred to the money which contributes directly to a campaign by an individual or an organization and which is ruled by the Federal Election Commission.
The code of the Federal Election Commission specified the several actors of the finance of the electoral system and the modalities related to each contributor.

B. The actors of the finance

The electoral campaigns are opened to various contributors who haven't got the same rights or possibilities of finance. It is important to define their role in order to understand the whole finance of the electoral system. We must emphasize that a candidate can't invest more than $50, 000 of his private fortune during the campaign. A part of the finance come from contributions given by individuals. Individual's contributions are attributed to one or several candidates and are capped to $1, 000 per election. Each primary and each party committee is considered as an individual election. The individual has no right to directly give money for the presidential election which belongs to the federal field (excepted when a candidate refuses this federal funds). The individual's funds are limited to $25, 000 per year for the federal elections. How are this contributions divided? They included contributions to candidates, to  political parties committees and  to political parties. All this contributions given during an electoral campaign are controlled by the Federal Election Commission and in contrary to the phenomenon of “soft money” they are qualified of “hard money”. Of course,  it will be a mistake to consider that individuals didn't found means to skirt this legal frame.
Another part of the finance hail from companies' contributions. According to the legislation this companies which have a legal status can't abet to the finance of a candidate. They ought to pool to political action committees which support candidates. The legal status of this companies is used to establish the amount of contributions to the national party  committees and the candidates (we again mention the legal frame of “hard money”). Year after year the phenomenon of “soft money” grew and constituted a heavy problem within the electoral system. In fact, as individuals, companies found others ways to increase their indirect contributions and thus to enhance their influence.
The State is the last contributor to the finance of electoral campaigns. Each candidate has the possibility to get federal public funds (called “matching funds”) in additional to an equal quantity of private funds. Many modalities rule this grant of public federal funds. Thus a candidate has to collect at least $5, 000 in  twenty different states to obtain this support. This $5, 000 ought to result from contributions equal or lower than $250 per individual. This public funds administered by the Federal Election Commission come from the taxpayer who gives, only if he wants, $3 to the federal state. The achieved money is used to finance a part of candidates' expenses during the primaries or during the presidential campaign. A candidate can refuse the federal funds and decide to use his own funds. Then he will be free to spend the sum he wanted during his campaign. As an example, in 1992, Ross Perot chose to finance his whole campaign alone with his private fortune and was then free to expend as he wanted. ,Furthermore, during the primaries of 2000,  George W. Bush  refused the matching funds and thus followed his own rules of finance.

C. A controversial system of finance

In the United States we always talk about a bipartite system embodied by the Republicans and the Democrats and this phenomenon is clearly enhanced by the public finance of the presidential system. American specialists of the electoral system often criticize this finance because it totally forgets the smaller parties. The electoral system and its finance seem to have been created to prevent the emergence of other parties. In fact, to represent his party at an election  a candidate must satisfy to many modalities set up by the legislator such as the existence of a petition signed by thousand people who support the candidate. Moreover, a candidate of a party out of the majority will receive public funds only after his election contrary to a candidate who belongs to the two major parties and who receives matching funds from the primaries. This candidate is fairly disadvantaged.
We also must to underline the problem raised by the use of “soft money” during the election campaign. Most of this contributions are frequently accused to come from illegal practises which are near from a certain form of  corruption within the electoral system. Occult committees, rich businessmen and pressure groups try to increase their power and their influence during the electoral campaigns. Important flows of money and transactions are realised in parallel of the elections. Money took a too huge proportion in the American electoral system that conduct to abuses and management issues.

CONCLUSION

To conclude, many Americans agree the fact that their electoral system and its modalities should be reformed. The complexity of the procedure that consist in the election of Great Electors who have also to elect the President and the Vice President is highly contested. If we consider democracy as the election of a president by the people in a direct way  then we can underline a lack of democracy within the American system. To give more weight to the opinion of the people, a reform is planed in 2012 destined to review the number of  electoral college votes by states.
The finance of the system has also to be criticized. The part of controlled finance by the Federal Election Commission is too weak compared to the use of “soft money” during the elections and the campaigns. It created too many disparities between the different candidates and prevent the apparition of a third party which can bring more democracy within the political class.
Paradoxically, the United States of America are still seen as a model for the new democracies in the whole world.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Websites

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/electcollege.htm

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/2012-Electoral-Votes-By-State.htm

http://www.netplaces.com/government-jobs/so-you-want-to-work-for-the-government/how-the-president-is-elected.htm

http://www.madore.org/~david/misc/us-voting.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html

Books

Civilisation des Etas-Unis, by  Marie-Christine Pauwels, ed. Hachette Supérieur (4th ed.. 2005)

Le système politique américain on behalf of Edmond Orban and Michel Fortmann, ed. Les presses de l'université de Montréal (3rd ed. 2001)

The Political system of the United States by John D. Lees, ed. Faber and Faber (3rd ed. 1983)

Government by the people by Burns, Peltason, Cronin and Magleby, ed. Prentice-Hall  (16th ed. 1995)

Dernier cours de droit américain

INTRODUCTION

1^st Part: Pre-Trial civil procedures

The rules of civil procedure vary among the states, but most states rules are similar to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).

Consequently, procedure will be explained by reference to the FRCP.

A significant portion of civil proceedings in the US actually takes place before trial, and many cases end before reaching the trial stage (about 90%)

Before taking a case to court, it is generally preferable to send the other party a demand letter, seeking an out-of-court resolution of the dispute.

If that attempt fails, a person who wishes to initiate a civil action must choose whether to start a court action or seek arbitration.

Arbitration has become a more and more popular alternative to traditional justice, and it allows cases to be resolved more quickly than a court procedure would.

Many contracts, for example, stipulate that arbitration must be sought in the event of a dispute.

1. The Pleading Stage of the Case

• Plaintiff’s Complaint

A civil action begins when the plaintiff files a “complaint” with the clerk of the court.

The FRCP requires that the complaint contains a statement of the grounds upon which subject matter jurisdiction of the court is based, “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief” and a demand for the relief that the pleader seeks.

The complaint must be filed in a timely manner; meaning in compliance with the time limit provided by the relevant states’ or federal’s statutes of limitations.

After the plaintiff files the complaint with the court clerk, the clerk issues a “summons”.

This is an order of the court directing the defendant to respond to the complaint or suffer a “default judgment.”

Then, the plaintiff must arrange to have the summons and a copy of the complaint “served” on the defendant.

There are various methods of service, but the most common are in-hand personal service and service by mail.

• The Defendant’s Response to the Complaint

The defendant responding to the complaint has two options:

• The first is to raise one or more of several procedural defenses that are allowed to be raised by a “motion to dismiss.”

The defendant has the option of asserting certain procedural defenses in a motion to dismiss.

Those grounds are challenges to the court’s jurisdiction (personal or subject-matter), improper venue (place the case was filed), improper service of process, failure of the plaintiff to join an indispensable party, or failure of the plaintiff to state a legal claim.

The ground of “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted” is the only ground relating to the merits of the case that is allowed to be raised by motion this early in the suit.

• The second option is to contest the complaint on its merits by filing an “answer.”

The defendant’s answer contests the plaintiff’s claim on the merits.

The main parts of the answer are responses to the allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint and “affirmative defenses.”

In the responses to the allegations, the defendant is required to admit, deny or state lack of knowledge as to each allegation in the complaint (lack of knowledge is treated as a denial).

Affirmative defenses stated in the answer may include such grounds as contributory negligence, satisfaction of claim, fraud.

In a third part of the answer, the defendant may include any “counterclaims” against the plaintiff.

2. The Discovery Stage

After all matters of preliminary defenses and pleading are resolved, the facts of the case are investigated and developed through a pretrial process called “discovery.”

In discovery, the parties have the power to require anyone who has knowledge relevant to the case, including the opposing party, to come forward and divulge that knowledge under oath.

Discovery is largely conducted by the lawyers themselves independently of the court or a judge.

Any necessary discovery meetings, including the taking of testimony, are generally held in the office of one of the discovering party’s attorneys.

There are five different discovery devices:

• Depositions

The first and most widely used is the oral “deposition.”

Any person, who has information relevant to the case, can be compelled to undergo a deposition, or be “deposed.”

A court reporter who is a notary is present to swear the deponent (the person being deposed) and to make a verbatim record of the examination as in court.

Depositions are useful tools for preparing for trial.

They allow the lawyers to directly question the opposing witnesses and party well before trial, and to better evaluate how they will perform at trial.

• Interrogatories

The second most used devices are “interrogatories” sent to the opposing party.

Interrogatories are written questions that must be answered under oath in writing.

The advantage of interrogatories is that they are cheap and easy to use.

• Requests to Produce Documents and Things

Like interrogatories, “requests for production of documents” can be sent only to an opposing party.

This device is often used in conjunction with interrogatories, thus allowing a party to ask about documents and then require that appropriate copies be attached.

• Order for Physical or Mental Examination

An order of this type is type is used to verify a party’s physical condition by requiring that the party be examined by a doctor chosen by the opposing party.

• Requests for Admissions

“Requests for admissions” are written requests asking that the opposing party admit the truth of certain facts which discovery shows are essentially undisputed.

3. Motion for Summary Judgment and the Final pretrial Conference

• Summary Judgment

Summary judgment is based on the principle that the primary purpose of the trial is to determine the facts of the case.

If the facts of a case are not in dispute, there is no need for trial and at least the liability portion of the case can be disposed of summarily by the judge alone.

Thus, summary judgment will be granted if “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law”.

• Pretrial Conferences

As a means of managing a case, most judges hold pretrial conferences, which all the lawyers are required to attend.

Under the Federal Rules, the purpose of pretrial conferences is to manage the case in such a way as to assure that all settlement opportunities are explored, that wasteful pretrial activities are avoided and that the quality of the trial is improved through more open discovery and better case preparation.

After the final pretrial conference, the judge enters a “final pretrial order.”

It will recite all the facts and law applicable to the case that are not in dispute, set out the remaining issues to be tried, and list the witnesses to be called and exhibits to be presented at trial.

No witnesses may be called except those listed in the pretrial order.

No exhibits may be offered except those ruled admissible or designated as eligible to be offered at trial in the pretrial order.

No legal or factual issues and theories may be gone into at trial beyond those set out in the order.

The order may be changed only as necessary to “prevent manifest injustice.”

2nd part: Pre-Trial criminal procedures

In the US, most crimes are defined at local and state levels.

However, there is federal criminal legislation wherein federal crimes are listed and defined in very precise titles and subtitles.

Criminal procedure refers to the body of rules governing the enforcement of criminal law.

A key concept of the American procedure is the adversarial system, based on the notion that the interests of both parties must be balanced and that each mus have a fair say with the opportunity to challenge one’s opponent.

Accordingly, the rules of criminal procedure aim at ensuring fair proceedings, especially in relation to the rights of defendants.

1. Arrest, formal charges and the first appearance

Crimes are divided into “felonies” and misdemeanors”.

The classification is determined by the potential sentence:

• Felonies are crimes punishable by death or by imprisonment for a year or more, and
• Misdemeanors are punishable by less than a year in jail.

The felony-misdemeanor distinction has an impact upon the nature of pre-trial procedure.

As in most countries, the police are usually the first to arrive at the scene of a crime or to receive a report of one.

If the report is based upon police observation, and the police believe that they have “probable cause” to believe the suspect committed a crime, the suspect is immediately arrested.

“Probable cause” to arrest has been defined as existing when “the facts and circumstances within the officers’ knowledge and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information are sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that an offense has been or is being committed”.

If the report of a crime is based on information provided by a victim, the police will conduct a pre-arrest investigation to determine if there is sufficient evidence to support charges against a suspect.

The police may also seek an arrest warrant from a judge if they submit written affidavits (sworn statements under oath) showing that is probable cause to believe the accused committed the crime.

However, the vast majority of arrests are made based on probable cause, without a judicial warrant.

After an arrest, the police will also carry out any necessary investigation to gather further evidence against the person arrested.

Once an arrest is made, a higher police official and then the prosecutor will informally review the sufficiency of the evidence to determine whether to charge the accused with the crime, but these reviews are not impartial.

In general, the police carry out both pre-arrest and post-arrest investigations without any direct supervision or assistance from the prosecutor.

No judge or any other judicial officer has any responsibility for overall supervision of the investigation.

Police investigators do not have the power to issue subpoenas or otherwise compel unwilling witnesses of victims to give statements to them.

Instead, they must resort to persuasion, pressure or charm, as the situation demands.

The only way that witnesses can be compelled to come forward is if a grand jury conducts the investigation and it issues a subpoena.

The more familiar role of grand juries is more passive – they are used to screen cases after the prosecution decides it has enough evidence to charge a person.

But some jurisdictions provide for investigation grand juries, which can issue a subpoena to witnesses, including potential defendants.

Even if a person is called before a grand jury, that person can decline to testify on grounds of self incrimination under the 5^th amendment.

If the prosecution believes the evidence the person has is crucial to the investigation of others, it can obtain a court order compelling the person to testify.

However, the prosecution must first grant the witness immunity from prosecution for any crimes revealed by the compelled testimony or derived from it.

If charges are authorized by the prosecutor, a “complaint” is filed in Court.

A judge or magistrate then conducts an ex parte review of it and supporting information to assure that there is sufficient incriminating information to establish probable cause.

This must take place within 48 hours after the arrest.

Ex parte in this context means that the prosecutor may participate, but neither the defendant nor the defendant nor the defendant’s lawyer is present.

The next stage is the defendant’s “first appearance” before a judge or a magistrate.

This 1^st appearance has several purposes:

• One is to assure that the person arrested is actually the person named in the complaint
• Another is to advise the defendant of the charge against him or her and to provide information about rights the accused will have in future proceedings. These include the right to a lawyer. For most defendants, this the point at which a lawyer is appointed.
• The judge also decides whether the defendant may be released pending trial. Pre-trial release has traditionally been referred to as “release on bail”.

In the case of a felony, the judge sets a date for a “preliminary examination”.

If the case is a misdemeanor, preliminary examination is not necessary and the case may be tried immediately.

2. Preliminary Hearings, Indictments or information

In felony cases, the next step is to screen the evidence against the defendant to see if it can support a formal charge.

This is done in one of 2 ways:

• By a Judge or magistrate after a preliminary hearing or
• By a grand jury

If the preliminary hearing route is used and the case survives, a “prosecutor’s information” is filed with the trial court.

If the case goes through a Grand jury, a “grand jury indictment” is filed.

Please note that the 5^th Amendment of the US Constitution requires that federal prosecutors proceed by grand jury indictment in all felony cases.

As to States, as usual, it depends.

The preliminary examination or hearing takes place before a judge or magistrate a few weeks after the first appearance.

Both sides are present and are represented by counsel.

The issue at the preliminary hearing is whether there is enough evidence to “bind over” the defendant for trial.

For a “bind over”, the court must find that:

• A crime has been committed and
• There is “probable cause” to believe that the defendant committed it (“probable cause” in this context is generally defined as sufficient evidence to hold the defendant for trial

Charges are rarely dismissed as a result of the preliminary hearing.

Because the preliminary examination is designed for the protection of the defendant, the defendant can waive it.

Within a short time after the indictment or information has been filed with the trial court, the defendant is “arraigned before that court.

This means that the defendant is brought before the court to be formally charged with the crime as specified in the indictment or information.

At the arraignment, the defendant is informed of the charges and asked to plead guilty or not guilty.

The process for accepting a guilty plea is the following:

• The defendant stands in Court with defense counsel and the judge questions the defendant personally about the plea
• The judge’s purpose in inquiring is twofold: to assure that the guilty plea is voluntary and to set out sufficient facts to show that the defendant is in fact guilty of the offense
• Without establishing both these matters on the record, the plea cannot be accepted by the court and the case will be set for a trial.

If the defendant does not plead guilty at the arraignment, the judge sets a date for a trial.

3. Pre-Trial motions

Prior to the trial, a defendant has the right to raise several motions.

A common motion is a “Brady motion”, which is a motion for discovery of the prosecution’s evidence.

Even though prosecutors are not required to turn over their entire file to the defendant, they are required under the due process clause to turn over all the exculpatory evidence in their possessions.

A defendant can also raise a motion to suppress evidence when it is obtained through unconstitutional police methods

3rd part: Trial procedures: civil and criminal

1. Trial Procedure

• Jury Selection

The Jury selection process: the purpose of jury selection sometimes called “voir dire”, is to determine the qualifications of potential members of the jury and to select an impartial jury to try the case.

Following jury selection, the jury is sworn to decide the case impartially and is given some preliminary instructions on the format of the trial and their duties.

Most important, they are admonished (or warned) to keep an open mind and not to discuss the case with anyone (even among themselves) until the evidence, arguments and final instructions have been completed and they have retired to deliberate.

• Opening statements

After the jury is selected, sworn and seated, the lawyers are permitted to make “opening statements” to the jury.

The purpose of the opening statements is to allow the parties to outline the facts in the case and to introduce the jury to their claims or defenses.

• Presentation of Evidence (proofs)

Following the opening statements, the most important part of the trial starts with the lawyers for the parties presenting their cases – the evidence of their side.

The plaintiff (or the prosecution in a criminal case) goes first and presents the “plaintiff’s case” (called the government’s case or state’s case in a criminal action).

Then, the defendant’s lawyers present the “defendant’s case”.

Following that, the plaintiff or prosecution has the opportunity to present a “rebuttal case”.

The lawyers presenting the evidence have three principal tasks: presenting witness testimony, presenting documents of other tangible evidence, and making and defending against objections to evidence.

2. Witness testimony

Witnesses may testify based only on personal knowledge and generally witnesses may not testify to “hearsay” – what someone else told the witness.

A court stenographer takes down verbatim all the testimony and everything else said in the proceedings.

The side that called the witness questions the witness first on “direct examination”.

The opposing side is then given the right to conduct a “cross examination” of the witness.

Following the cross examination, the side that called the witness then has the opportunity to conduct a “redirect examination”.

A “recross examination” and even possibly a second redirect examination may follow, but these are discretionary with the judge.

• Direct examination

A direct examination has 3 parts:

• Background of the witness (who the witness is, where the witness works, etc.)
• Setting the scene by describing the place where the incident occurred,
• Action, that is, description of the incident itself.

In getting the witness’s story out, the witness will usually be answering the five essential “W” questions that any good newspaper story answers – who, what, where, when and why?

• Cross Examination

The purpose of cross examination may in some cases be to seek out information, but more often its main purpose is to undermine the credibility of the witness’s direct examination testimony.

• Redirect Examination

Redirect examination is the opportunity for the direct examiner to return to “repair” any damage done on cross examination.

3. Motions for a Directed verdict

Following the plaintiff’s or prosecution’s presentation of evidence, the defense may move for a “directed verdict” on the basis of the plaintiff’s evidence, even before presenting the defense case.

In a criminal case, a similar motion is made after presentation of the prosecution’s evidence and it is often called a “motion for judgment of acquittal”.

The motion seeks dismissal of the case on the ground that the plaintiff or prosecution has failed to produce sufficient evidence for rational jurors to return a verdict in its favor.

The defendant has the right to make a second motion for a directed verdict or judgment of acquittal after all the evidence has been presented.

4. Closing arguments

After both the plaintiff and defendant have “rested their cases” meaning that they have presented all their evidence, it is time for “closing arguments”.

Closing arguments are the opportunity given to the lawyers in the case to address the jury directly and seek to persuade the jury to decide the case in their side’s favor.

Closing is certainly the most “flashy” of all the things that trial lawyers do in trials, but it is not necessarily the most important.

If the evidence has not been presented effectively, a brilliant closing argument will not save the case.

5. Jury Instructions

At the end of all the proofs and usually after closing argument, the judge will provide jury instructions on the law applicable to the case.

This will include the substantive law related to the claim made or offense charged, such as the requirements for a binding contract or the elements of murder.

The Jury is also told what standard of proof is to apply in deciding the case.

In a criminal case, the standard is “proof beyond a reasonable doubt”. Thus, the Jury is told that it may find the defendant guilty only if it finds beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime and that it must acquit the defendant if it has a reasonable doubt as to the defendant’s guilt.

In a civil case, the standard of proof is the “preponderance of the evidence”, sometimes referred to as the “greater weight of the evidence”.

A typical instruction explaining reasonable doubt tells the jury:

Reasonable doubt means a doubt based upon reason and common sense that arises from a faire and rational consideration of all the evidence or lack of evidence in the case.

It is a doubt that is not vague, speculative or imaginary doubt, but such a doubt as would cause reasonable persons to hesitate to act in matters of serious importance to themselves.

A typical instruction explaining the civil standard is:

“When I use the expression “by a preponderance of the evidence”, I mean that you must be persuaded from a consideration of all the evidence in the case that the issue in question is more probably true than not true.

Any findings of fact you must make must be based on probabilities, not possibilities.

It may not be based on guess, speculation or conjecture”.

6. Deliberation and Verdict

Because jury deliberations are undertaken in secret and every jury is unique, little of a general nature can be said about what happens in deliberations.

In most civil cases, a “general verdict” stating the bare conclusion of the jury is rendered and there will be two choices, either “we find for the plaintiff and award damages of X $” or we find for the defendant.

In a criminal case, the form for a general verdict will allow the jury to check either guilty or not guilty on each of the charges tried.

4th part: post trial civil procedures: motions, judgment and appeals

1. Post trial motions

The defense may take a motion after a verdict is rendered.

In civil cases, this is called a motion for “judgment notwithstanding the verdict” or “judgment NOV”.

However, a directed verdict or judgment NOV may be granted only if there is a “no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury” to decide for the plaintiff.

The judge in a civil case may also “set aside” the verdict and grant new trial if it is “against the great weight of the evidence” or If liability is correct, but the verdict is grossly excessive or inadequate.

A party may also seek to set aside the verdict on the ground that the jury acted improperly during deliberations or trial.

This is called “impeaching a verdict”.

2. Judgments

After the trial, a judgment is entered on the jury verdict, subject to any post trial motions.

There are several kinds of relief that may be granted in a judgment, such as money judgment or equitable relief.

The most common form of equitable relief is the injunction.

An injunction can be simple, such as an order to the defendant not to come onto the plaintiff’s property.

Other forms of equitable relief include “reformation” or “rescission” of a contract, and “specific performance”, which is an order requiring the breaching party to perform obligations required under the contract.

Judgments not only award relief.

They also settle claims, defenses, and issues that were in dispute between the parties.

3. Appeals

• Appellate review

The scope of appellate review of trial court judgments depends on two factors: whether the issue reviewed is one of fact or one of law and, if one of fact, whether the fact finder was a judge or a jury.

An appellate court can review issues of law de novo and will reverse any non-harmless error, but it is much more limited in its review of the factual basis for a trial court judgment.

When a trial judge sits as the fact-finder in a bench trial, the judge’s findings of fact will be reversed only if they are “clearly erroneous”.

Review of jury verdicts is even more limited: the verdict of the jury can be reversed only if there is a complete absence of any substantial credible evidence to support it.

Simple disagreement with the verdict is not sufficient.

In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, the appellate court must be careful to substitute its view for that of the jury.

This would be a violation of the fundamental right to a trial by jury.

• Appellate court procedure

The issues of law raised on appeal are argued principally through the exchange of written briefs between the parties.

Some limited oral argument before the court is permitted.

The maximum time for oral argument permitted for each side is usually 15 or 30 minutes.

An appellate court decides a case by issuing an order or judgment indicating who wins and, usually the opinion of the court setting out the reasons for the decision.

There are various actions that an appellate court can take:

• It can affirm the judgment of the trial court, meaning that it approves of it.

• When an appellate court sends an appealed case back to the trial court for further action, the case is said to be remanded.

• It can reverse that judgment and direct entry of judgment for the opposing side.

A final trial court judgment deciding the case on the merits or dismissing it is usually the only kind of judgment or order that can be appealed.

5th part: post trial criminal procedures: sentencing and appeals

1. Sentencing procedures

Upon the defendant pleading guilty or being found guilty after a trial, the next step is to determine what punishment is appropriate to impose a sentence.

The judge will set a separate date for sentencing and order the preparation of a “pre-sentence report”.

This report is prepared by an agency attached to the court generally the “probation department”.

The report addresses the defendant’s background as it relates to factors relevant to sentencing.

On the date set for sentencing, the defendant appears once more before the judge and has the right to address the judge personally or through defense counsel on the question of sentence.

In serious cases, the judge may hear witness testimony or statements.

A very broad range of sentences is available to courts, from fines or community services to capital punishment in the state which have death penalty statutes or at the federal level.

2. Appellate review of convictions

Defendants convicted in a state trial court generally have a statutory right to one appeal, usually to the intermediate appellate court of the state.

The defense sometimes files a motion for a new trial which may be granted if new evidence is brought to the judge’s attention.

If the state’s intermediate appellate court affirms the conviction, they have the right to petition for leave (permission) to appeal to the state supreme court.

Defendants may also file a petition for certiorari in the US Supreme Court in an effort to gain review of any federal issues raised.