Impartial Jury Pros And Cons

717 Words2 Pages

The United States Constitution is a set of amendments that are made specifically for the rights of the people. Three freedoms that the government should uphold in order to ensure that the soldiers that died in the civil war did not die in vain are the freedom of peaceful assembly, freedom of petitioning the government, and an impartial jury. Freedom of peaceful assembly is defined as the right to hold public meetings or parade without the government interfering. It's important to uphold this freedom so the people of our country can peacefully stand for the things they believe in. This allows them to express their ideas and opinions with people who have the same views as them and want to bring awareness to it. However, although the government isn't allowed to interfere with the assembly, they are allowed to place restrictions on it that involve the time, place, and manner. These …show more content…

The Sixth Amendment states the rights that every convict receives when on trial, among those rights is an impartial jury. An impartial jury is an important right because it gives the accused a fair fighting chance in their trial. However, in some cases the supposedly impartial jury turns to their bias when making a verdict. For example, the Foster v. Chatman case. Timothy Tyrone Foster, an 18 year-old black male, was convicted for the murder of Queen White, an elderly white woman. The jury on the case was an all white jury, despite the four qualified black jurors, after the prosecution provided reasons that the trial court found sufficient. After hearing the case, the jury ruled Foster guilty and imposed the death penalty. Although it was repeatedly denied by the court, there was enough evidence to prove that there was purposeful discrimination when picking a jury for the case. If there was an unbiased and impartial jury in the case, Foster would have had a better chance at being found

More about Impartial Jury Pros And Cons

Open Document