Case Study:
Judge Judy (Sheindlin). The People’s Court. Judge Joe Brown. Judge Greg Mathis. Judge Mabeline Ephraim. Judge Marilyn Milian, Judge Glenda Hatchett. Judge Mills Lane. Judge Maria Lopez. Judge Lynn Toler. Judge Alex Ferrer TV Judges are popular. Select ONE popular televised judge and watch at least one televised show during which they preside over the legal matters. These judges also commonly have websites and you should review those as well (for example: https://www.judgejudy.com).
You are required to use a minimum of 3 (three) outside sources to support your points in your paper. Make sure you include a proper reference page.
In a 2 to 3 page paper, and using APA style formatting, analyze the impact that “reality” television has on “real” courtroom proceedings.
At the end of your essay in 150 words describe if any additional legal assistance be given to financially needy people other than what is guaranteed by the Constitution – family issues, child support and child custody, consumer rights, debt and credit issue etc. Support your position and use appropriate examples. What should be the standard for deciding who gets legal counsel and what rights should we be most concerned with?
- Identify and explain the judge and the proceeding that you viewed. Compare the behavior of selected televised judge with the normal expectations of a judge as described in your textbook.
- Write down three things that you think you know about the legal system based on your experience watching law related shows and then discuss whether or not your observations are, indeed, true.
- In what ways might the popularity of judges such as Judge Judy and others be related to the public desire to be able to see the actual courtroom proceeding?
- If people enjoy the entertainment factor or these shows, what damage could result?
- How do these shows differ from court TV?
- How do you think these shows differ from actual court cases?
- How might such television shows influence a potential juror in a case?
- Do you think these shows are valuable or damaging to the criminal justice system as it exists? Why?