.Notes: - I will be giving the answer but I want (the writer) to expand the work and reach 1,500 words. - Writing must be first person (because I am supposed to be talking about my journey to the court and what I have witnessed). - The answers to the questions must be based on Australian especially (Queensland constitution system). - There will be questions, which should be answered at first in the (structure of the report). - The seven questions are: Which court did you attend, and what kind of hearing did you observe? (2 marks) What were the charges against the defendant? Were these summary or indictable offences? How did you know this? (3 marks) Identify who was present in the courtroom and describe the role you observed them perform. (4 marks) Briefly describe the physical layout of the courtroom. How did this reinforce the role and status of the judge, jury, lawyers and/or accused? (4 marks) Describe the courtroom procedures that took place, including the giving of evidence and arguments. Were these easy to follow? Why/why not? (4 marks) What was the most interesting thing you observed during your visit? (2 marks) - Define the concepts of due process and the rule of law. Discuss the extent to which these concepts were upheld or undermined in the courtroom you visited (6 marks - reference to the last question must be referenced correctly using apa style. - The first 6 questions requires the court’s name and the address as a reference (because that were I got my info from) so it most be referenced, except the question 7 which I have refered to that it should be well referenced. - Include the questions as sub headings in the report. - Use of appropriate academic writing style (standard writing). - Because it’s a made up cenario, therefore I will be giving the main point or another words I will be giving the idea of the answer and the writer must expand it to fit the word limit. (The word limit is 1,500 words) (excluding the references + in-text references). Here I will be giving the information and I want to applied on the questions below. So I have attended the court on 7/april/2017, I chose to attened to the Brisbane court because I it has a trail that fits on my free time, the trail began at 12.05pm (court number 16). I attended Mental Health court because oveuslly the issue has to do with mental illness. So the defendant his name is Rafael john he is (Australian) indigenous 19 years old boy. So the boy has done several damages such as property damage and contributing in violence towards the community. And this is his not first time being contributed to damages and violence; on 2013 he were cought be the police for getting into a fight (twise in the same year), 2014 he caused a property damage (car), 2015 he got into a fight, and this year as well he contributed in to fight (2017). The bog (Rafael) were send to doctor, so that the doctor understands his issue and submit a report to the court proving that rafeal he have problems with toxication, ADHD and several mental problems. According to doctor Khan (the doctor who submitted the report about Rafael’s condition to the court) he believed that the reason behind these damages wither its property damage or contributing to fights etc it was all because of the drinking, adhd disorder and the mental problems he has (because when rafaerl were in school he used to get bullyed a lot and therefore it caused the mental problems and led his to become more lonely and from there he began drinking and taking drugs (toxication). According to the school report (that Rafael used to attend) it shows that rafeal has an average IQ from 55 to 65 which proves that what doctor khan’s point were right (which is: rafael’s mental health is effected and that Rafael does not contributes to violence and damaging people property deliberately and therefore the court must understand his issue and what Rafael been through. And based on a doctor seggestions that the defendant must be send to psychiatrist in order to help his go through is mental problems and change to a better person rather then send Rafael to prison. The outcome of the court was is that they were willing to send Rafael to psychiatrist in order to change and develop mentally as well as work on preventing him from drinking/drugs again. Answers the 6/7 question here.. - Which court did you attend, and what kind of hearing did you observe? (2 marks) - What were the charges against the defendant? Were these summary or indictable offences? How did you know this? (3 marks) - Identify who was present in the courtroom and describe the role you observed them perform. (4 marks) Briefly describe the physical layout of the courtroom.\ How did this reinforce the role and status of the judge, jury, lawyers and/or accused? (4 marks) Describe the courtroom procedures that took place, including the giving of evidence and arguments. Were these easy to follow? Why/why not? (4 marks) What was the most interesting thing you observed during your visit? (2 marks) - Briefly describe the physical layout of the courtroom. How did this reinforce the role and status of the judge, jury, lawyers and/or accused? (4 marks) Describe the courtroom procedures that took place, including the giving of evidence and arguments. Were these easy to follow? Why/why not? (4 marks) What was the most interesting thing you observed during your visit? (2 marks) - Define the concepts of due process and the rule of law. Discuss the extent to which these concepts were upheld or undermined in the courtroom you visited (6 marks) (note to answer the last question, the writer of the report must use strong sources such as book and the reference to the last question must be referenced correctly using apa style. Please go through the marking criteria/written structure.