Sample Criminal Justice Paper on Court Case Determination

Interpretation of art can be contradicting if different aspects of cultural diversity – such as demonstrating different faces of humanity – are inaccurately inferred by different societies. It is important to remember that cultural diversity should promote moral and cultural values that enhance ethical behavior among members of a given community. As a judge deliberating on a case between an Attorney District and organizers of a public event displaying sexually explicit artwork content, the following verdict has been issued:  The court has decided to uphold an injunction submitted by the District Attorney prohibiting a public art gallery event from displaying obscene content as a means of portraying different faces of humanity.

It has been determined and proven that the public art event is likely to attract immoral behavior among members of our community. The court is more concerned with children as their cultural values could be diminished in future stages of life. Most importantly, the children are advised not to attend such events as this might lead to a polarized society which does not promote the ethical values of its members (Lovan, Murray & Shaffer, 2017). The court has also realized that there are better means that artists can promote their profession when developing different faces of humanity. According to images presented to the court – which were to be used for the event – the main theme that comes into existence includes sex and sexual exploitation. As a result, the court is committed to ensuring that future interpretation of such images does not print a negative image of the current generation.

There are measures that were adopted to dismiss any cases of personal bias in the decision-making process that issued the verdict. For instance, similar court verdicts were referenced to determine key factors that resulted in the issuance of a particular judgment. Aside from benchmarking, the merit of each party in the case has been similarly considered in the decision-making process that resulted in the verdict issued. The District Attorney was comprehensive in illustrating the social damage that would result from the public gallery as evidenced in different parts of the world. However, it is unfortunate that the presented images fall below moral standards despite depicting an interpretation of different faces of humanity.

It is important to note that political interference in judicial processes has continually undermined the court’s independence and hence should be discouraged to protect our democracy. Democracy is shielded by an accurate interpretation of the law which bases its court verdicts on motive and intent of a criminal act (Llanos et al. 2016). Most importantly, a decision that favors the majority should be highly regarded to avoid escalating a conflict arising from cultural or social disagreements. The independence of the judiciary should be protected to ensure that the rule of law applies indiscriminately among the accused and complainants.

As noted above, it has been determined how artwork can benefit a community instead of destroying cultural beliefs that shape the moral behavior of community members. Obscene content should not be displayed publicly – as a means of promoting artwork – since this would attract negative consequences in the affected communities (Starr, 2017). Our cultural values should be protected to ensure that generations of a community do not disappear into unethical and immoral behavior promoted by sexually sensitive materials. The art industry should be the custodian of modern cultural values which promote moral and ethical behavior among communities. The court has a jurisdiction to compel a change in the artwork industry if cultural values are slowly eroding in our societies.




Llanos, M., Tibi Weber, C., Heyl, C., & Stroh, A. (2016). Informal interference in the judiciary          in new democracies: A comparison of six African and Latin American             cases. Democratization23(7), 1236-1253.

Lovan, W. R., Murray, M., & Shaffer, R. (2017). Participatory governance: planning, conflict            mediation and public decision-making in civil society. Routledge.

Starr, D. (2017). Case notes: Federal court judgments. Ethos: Official Publication of the Law           Society of the Australian Capital Territory, (246), 56.