Trial By Jury Pros And Cons

1037 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Role of a jury in a criminal trial

What if there was a trial for a crime and someone were going to be tried by a jury ? Wouldn ' t it be interesting to know how they were being tried ? Or in a civil court case wouldn ' t it be interesting to know about the system that would rule for one to side to win and for the other side to lose ? Or what if someone has been asked for jury duty in a court case ? Wouldn ' t it be interesting to know what kind of system would be in place and working . If you look back the history at the jury system the answers to these questions will be found .
The Constitutional right to have a trial by a jury of one ' s peers is a key part of the freedoms given by the U . S . Constitution ' s Bill Of Rights . A trial by jury puts twelve citizens into a jury who decides the outcome of a criminal court case or a civil court case . The power of the government is unable to take away someone ' s right to life , liberty or property until it has convinced the twelve people on the jury that person has done a crime or has not done a crime beyond a reasonable doubt . In a civil or a non – criminal case the jury represents common sense in resolving disputes . Trial by jury ' s also an important part of our democracy . Other than voting nothing is so active and able for people to participate in than being on a jury . Thomas Jefferson said that Trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man , by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution “ .
A French statesman named Alexis de Tocqueville said in his travels throughout Nineteenth – Century America that not only does the institution of a jury helps improve the law , but it also improves the jurors as well . It educates the jurors about the law and le...

... middle of paper ...

...ce . When ratification of The Fourteenth Amendment guaranteed equal protection to all citizens of The United States Of America The Supreme Court decided that this meant a trial by jury too . Strauder v . West Virginia stated that just because someone was considered for jury service didn ' t mean that they didn ' t have the right to serve on a jury . Therefore this means that African Americans were frequently discriminated against being on juries until The Civil Rights Movement of the1960 ' S and on . Women also faced challenges to be able to be an jury and in 1975 , the ability for men and women to serve on juries with equal terms was gained . The jury system has made a lot of progress from when a suspect was tried by a self – informing jury to the current grand juries of today the jury system is a important part of American democracy and of democracy in general .

Show More
Related

  • Dbq Essay On The Jury System

    921 Words  | 2 Pages

    The American Jury system has been around for quite some time. It was the original idea that the framers of the constitution had wanted to have implemented as a means of trying people for their illegal acts, or for civil disputes. The jury system has stood the test of time as being very effective and useful for the justice system. Now it has come into question as to if the jury system is still the best method for trials. In the justice system there are two forms of trials, one being the standard jury trial, where 12 random members of society come together to decide the outcome of something. The other option would be to have a bench trial. In a bench trial, the judge is the only one deciding the fate of the accused. While both methods are viable

    Read More

  • Professional Jurors Pros And Cons

    235 Words  | 1 Pages

    Beverly, I am also a proponent of the United States developing a system of professional jurors. I also believe it would cut down on biased opinions and help rebuild people’s faith in our criminal justice system. In addition to the points you made, I believe professional jurors also would alleviate the process of the prosecution and defense counsel being able to stack the jury pool with individuals favorable to them. Although the U.S. is a country that is for the people, many citizens don’t want to set on a panel of jurors to determine the fate of an individual they do not know (Weigman, 2011). The main reasons for this is because, it causes them to be pulled away from their livelihoods, which for many encompasses work and family. Lastly,

    Read More

  • Australia's Unfair Legal System

    821 Words  | 2 Pages

    They weigh the evidence and apply the law. In the court system, criminal law is interpreted by a jury who are seen as expressing the sense of justice of ordinary men and women. Juries date back to the Middle Ages in England, and while membership, role, and importance have changed throughout the ages, they were part of the system of England’s Common Law. The purpose of the jury system was to ensure the civil rights of the ordinary citizen. It is important to remember that at the time, ordinary people had few rights.

    Read More

  • The Use of the Peremptory Challenge in the U.S. Legal System

    2601 Words  | 6 Pages

    Over 80 million Americans alive today have been called to jury duty at some point in their lives (Henley 5). Out of these 80 million individuals, roughly 30% (or 24 million) have been eliminated from the jury selection process due to the use of peremptory challenges (5). According to Black’s Law Dictionary, a peremptory challenge is a challenge that “need not be supported by any reason.” Although these challenges are commonplace in today’s courts, several Supreme Court cases have questioned the constitutionality of their place in the legal system. This paper will explore the history of peremptory challenges, theories behind them, a few pertinent cases, and reform progress.

    Read More

  • The Judicial Process and Batson Case

    2726 Words  | 6 Pages

    Smith, William (1997) “Useful or Just Plain Unfair? The Debate Over Peremptories; Lawyers, Judges Spllit Over the Value of Jury Selection Method” The Legal Intelligencer, April 23: pg 1.

    Read More

  • Jury Nullification: Power, Impact and Controversy

    1444 Words  | 3 Pages

    At trial, your life is in the palms of strangers who decide your fate to walk free or be sentenced and charged with a crime. Juries and judges are the main components of trials and differ at both the state and federal level. A respectable citizen selected for jury duty can determine whether the evidence presented was doubtfully valid enough to convict someone without full knowledge of the criminal justice system or the elements of a trial. In this paper, juries and their powers will be analyzed, relevant cases pertaining to jury nullification will be expanded and evaluated, the media’s part on juries discretion, and finally the instructions judges give or may not include for juries in the court. Introduction Juries are a vital object to the legal system and are prioritized as the most democratic element in our society, aside from voting, in our society today.

    Read More

  • The History of Juries

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.

    Read More

  • The Criminal Trial Process

    1065 Words  | 3 Pages

    They are the impartial third-party whose responsibility is to deliver a verdict for the accused based on the evidence presented during trial. They balance the rights of society to a great extent as members of the community are involved. This links the legal system with the community and ensures that the system is operating fairly and reflecting the standards and values of society. A trial by jury also ensures the victim’s rights to a fair trial. However, they do not balance the rights of the offender as they can be biased or not under. In the News.com.au article ‘Judge or jury? Your life depends on this decision’ (14 November 2013), Ian Lloyd, QC, revealed that “juries are swayed by many different factors.” These factors include race, ethnicity, physical appearance and religious beliefs. A recent study also found that juries are influenced by where the accused sits in the courtroom. They found that a jury is most likely to give a “guilty” verdict if the accused sits behind a glass dock (ABC News, 5 November 2014). Juries also tend to be influenced by their emotions; hence preventing them from having an objective view. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘Court verdicts: More found innocent if no jury involved’ (23 November 2013), 55.4 per cent of defendants in judge-alone trials were acquitted of all charges compared with 29 per cent in jury trials between 1993 and 2011. Professor Mark Findlay from the University of Sydney said that this is because “judges were less likely to be guided by their emotions.” Juries balance the rights of victims and society to a great extent. However, they are ineffective in balancing the rights of the offender as juries can be biased which violate the offender’s rights to have a fair

    Read More

  • The Jury and Its Role in the Courts of Trial

    1507 Words  | 4 Pages

    The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.

    Read More

  • The Criminal Trial Process

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.

    Read More

  • Arguments For and Against Juries

    692 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... In a speech to the House of Lords in 1844 Lord Denman remarked: 'Trial by jury itself, instead of being a security to persons who are accused, will. be a delusion, a mockery and a snare. The question of juror competence remains a recurrent feature in both the research and policy. literature (Horowitz et al., 1996; Penrod & Heuer, 1997). Indeed, in the. 1998 the Home Office invited commentary on whether an alternative to the traditional jury system was appropriate for cases of serious fraud.

    Read More

  • Jury Nullification

    3967 Words  | 8 Pages

    Some of the people in the world always ask themselves this question when in the court room “ WHY DID OUR FOUNDING FATHERS EXPECT CITIZEN JURIES TO JUDGE OUR LAWS AS WELL AS THE GUILT OF THE INDIVIDUAL ?” Well the answer is really simple its Because: "If a juror accepts as the law that which the judge states then that juror has accepted the exercise of absolute authority of a government employee and has surrendered a power and right that once was the citizen's safeguard of liberty." (1788) (2 Elliots Debates, 94, Bancroft, History of the Constitution, 267) "Jury nullification of law", as it is sometimes called, is a traditional American right defended by the Founding Fathers. Those Patriots intended the jury serve as one of the tests a law must pass before it assumes enough popular authority to be enforced. Thus the Constitution provides five separate tribunals with veto power -- representatives, senate, executive, judges and jury -- that each enactment of law must pass before it gains the authority to punish those who choose to violate it.

    Read More

  • Importance Of Jury Selection

    2734 Words  | 6 Pages

    The right to a trial by jury is deeply embedded in the American democratic stance. This shines through the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments

    Read More

  • Jury System Dbq Essay

    679 Words  | 2 Pages

    So the first reading that convinced me having a jury system was a bad idea was document F. This was a passage from a book called Roughing It by Mark Twain. He talks about a murder that happened in Virginia and how a prominent banker and valued citizen was denied to be on the case because he knew about the case beforehand. This circulated in my head and did not make sense to me, the jury would rather be full of unvalued citizens who have no

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Jury System In 12 Angry Men By Sidney Lumet

    1175 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mention the pros and cons of our jury system and possible alternatives of it. Also, identify the group dynamics of the jury members

    Read More

More about Trial By Jury Pros And Cons

Open Document