Roman Trial Essay

Although from vastly different time periods, the Roman’s methods of conducting trials are not so different from the present. Both trials hold exclusive methods for civil and criminal trials that have molded our definition of justice. However, the differences are apparent as well. Both trials demonstrate the differences in historical context, political climates, and legal frameworks. The Roman legal system underwent a multitude of different changes over the course of its dominant rule. The Roman legal system underwent two major changes from Legis Actiones, also known as the twelve tables, to the formulary system, and to the final institution of cognitio extraordinaria. From start to finish, the legal procedures remained important factors

This policy was similar to legis actiones, but gave more power to the magistrate who determined if a third party was necessary for the trial to proceed. The formulary system is also the founder of the court reporter, who would record everything said during the trial. The trial followed six parts: the nomiatio, appointment of a judge, the inentio, plaintiff's accusation, the condemnatio, the judge’s attempt at a resolution, the demonstatio, the displacement of the facts, the exceptio and the relicatio, the arguments and counterarguments between the plaintiff and defendant until a winner is determined, and the final step of praescriptio in which the plaintiff is relieved of bringing another case of similar stature against the

The American legal system defines two types of cases, a civil case and criminal case. A civil case follows these seven steps: opening statements, presentation of evidence between both sides, witness testimonies, cross examinations, cross statements, jury instructions, jury deliberations, and a verdict is delivered. If the verdict is seen as unfavorable, an appeal is possible similarly to the Roman system of cognitio extraordinaria. The criminal trial follows a much similar process excluding a bond hearing and the verdict among jurors. The jury in a criminal case must be unanimous in deciding a verdict unlike the civil case in which the jury must have a majority