Case About Anthony Tan

Concise Summary of subject area Anthony Tan was one of the most wanted men as he was allegedly charged for impinge on of Bosnian refugee and Rebels bikie, Edin Boz Smajovic. After 2 years building an export business in Vietnam, he necessitate a media report from NSW, describing him as one of the states most wanted men. He was unsuspecting for 2 years of the police hunt for him. He immediately got on the phone, first his lawyer, then to an airline. He was more than willing to return to Australia to fight his allegations.In the end he was arrested and charged for the murder and held on slacken in prison for over a year. When he granted bail in August, his trial was to depart that same week. Both Anthony Tan and co-accused Nathan Keith Reddy and taken to court. Once the fibre reached the self-governing Court, the case was dismissed nonetheless before the trial had started. This was because, it was understood that the case failed partly due to an alleged confession from a purs uance witness. Jurisdictions of all courts involved The two courts involved in this case were the Central Local Court and the controlling Court. The jurisdictions for the local court include the majority of vile, summary prosecutions in NSW and with civil matters up to $100,000. It withal conducts delegation proceedings to determine whether or non indictable offences are to be committed to the District and Supreme Court. Meanwhile the jurisdictions for the Supreme Court has unlimited civil jurisdictions and handles claims of more than $750,000. It also deals with the most serious criminal matters, including murder and treason.The initial court for this case (Central Local Court) had refused bail, but when it reached the Supreme Court, the case was dismissed pull down before the trail had even started. Area of law The Anthony Tan case was a public, criminal case, as Anthony allegedly broke the criminal law, which is part of the public law (also known as the Common law). The m easuring stick of trial impression is the amount of evidence which a plaintiff or prosecuting attorney, in a criminal case, mustiness be presented in a trial in narrate to win.As for a civil case the commonplace of proof is generally that the plaintiff must prove this case by majority (51%) of the evidence. The standard of proof for this case was it was beyond reasonable doubt. The standard of proof needed for a criminal case is that on that point must be no reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime in order to convict the defendant. The standard of proof in this criminal case, which resulted in the freedom of Mr. Tan, was an alleged confession from a prosecution witness, which led to the case to fail.Was a dialog box used? Why or why not? A jury is usually used in the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court referee had dismissed the case on technical terms, therefore a jury was not needed. It was an interesting case due to the fact that Tan was innocent yet held i n jail for more than 1 year. This had a major impact on Anthony Tans life, reputation and his future. For a case that would of continued in the Supreme Court, a jury would have been selected, but due to the fact that the case was dismissed, a jury was not needed.Is a jury effective? A jury is a group of citizens (usually of 12) who hears the testimony in legal disputes and determines what they believe is the truth. The word jury is derived from the French word jurer, which means, to swear an oath. The jury has generally been triple-crown because their peers judge the accused and the public plays a role in the criminal justice system, as they reach out the community feel as though they have a voice in situations that concern caller at large.The jury is there to represent a cross-section of society and they provide a arrange of perceptions. as well as the responsibility for the verdict is spread across 12 jurors and the system acts as a gum elastic net against corrupt and oppr essive conduct by state and/or police force. The jury is also carefully selected to avoid bias, prejudice, racist, sexist or any other form of discrimination, which can influence the verdict. Also the defense council can remove a juror, if they feel uncomfortable with them being in the jury.