Having a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of ones peers is a constitutional right given to all in the United States (U.S. Const. amend VI). Jurors are chosen for their ability JURY DECISION MAKING !54 to be unbiased. Both the prosecution and the defense have a hand in choosing jurors. Where one side may be in favor of a sympathetic mother of three the other may choose to select another juror in order to provide the best chance possible for their side of the argument. The process of being selected as a juror is cognitively exhausting itself and that is before the real trial ever begins (Winter & Greene, 2007). At the beginning of the trial, jurors are given vast amounts of information from the judge. Throughout the trial process jurors must actively listen to the testimony, remember what is being said, apply that to all the other information they have already heard, all while weighing what information may be true or false. It is important to note that jurors are not necessarily familiar with courtroom terms that are being used and in most cases it should be assumed that they have no prior knowledge or legal jargon (Smith, 1991). In fact, it is very possible that the juror has his or her own schemas that alter or skew the true meanings of courtroom terms. Pre-trial Publicity and Source Memory The sixth amendment to the constitution becomes a challenge when it comes to pre-trial publicity. The first amendment to the constitution protects a variety of rights including freedom of speech (U.S. Const. amend. I). This often becomes a conflict. The sixth amendment requires an impartial jury which is extremely difficult in an era of social media and a first amendment right of freedom of speech. There are many ways that pre-trial... ... middle of paper ... ...more likely to find someone guilty than the jurors that were not exposed to pre-trial publicity. The jurors who were exposed to the publicity that found the individual guilty also gave the individual significantly longer sentences in prison than jurors who were not exposed to publicity that found the individual guilty. The researchers also found that jurors that were exposed to pre-trial publicity were much more likely to suffer from critical source JURY DECISION MAKING !56 monitoring errors. These jurors accredited information learned from publicity to the court case and then used that negative publicity to influence their verdict decision because they truly believed it was a part of the trial. One thing to note is that the jurors did not necessarily believe that they did not hear it from pre-trial publicity but they believed they had also heard it in the courtroom.
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’.
Lieberman, J. D. (2002). Head over the heart or heart over the head? Cognitive experiential self-theory and extralegal heuristics in juror decision making. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(12), 2526-2553.
jury of his peers. When the result of a trial is a guilty verdict and the
Stevenson, D 2012, The function of uncertainty within jury systems, George Mason Law Review, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 513-548, viewed 6 May 2014, .
This is the sixth amendment and this tells you about what juries can do in cases of law. “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” What all of this means is that everyone that gets convicted of a crime gets all of the same benefits weather its a misdemeanor, felony, or capital crime. Everyone get the rights to a speedy trial and an impartial jury.
Jurors have to be chosen in an acceptable manner. It can not consist of just anyone. According
Mitchell and Daniel Eckstein describes a jury as a group who are chosen to perform a duty without training. Juries are not qualified for decision making because they don’t know the efficient way. Just because one person think one way everyone isn’t going to agree with that person. Mitchell and Eckstein focus on Janis’s seven antecedent conditions for groupthink. A significant risk of jury decisions being tainted by groupthink are cohesiveness, insulation, lack of a tradition of impartial leadership, lack of norms requiring methodical producers, homogeneity of social background, and temporarily low-self-induced by situational factors (Griffin, 2014, p. 117). As being in a group the outcome can cause problems because of groupthink. Groupthink will and can make the wrong decisions from deciding as a group. With decision-making, you will know the consequences behind your decisions. Groupthink will be completely different because juries make takes certain situations in consideration but, the judge have the last
Juries are a very important part of our legal system. In all cases, they are made up of ordinary citizens from the community, and randomly, from the electoral role, they
For instance, at the beginning of this movie, 11 men except one believed that that the accused man was guilty just because he had killed his dad. But as they analyzed each evidence and each testimony, the jury started to believe that the accused man was innocent as there were many factors that did not fit in with what the witnesses had said during the trial. For example, in the movie the jury argued that the old man’s testimony was not very accurate with the time of the stabbing because it was impossible for him to get up from his bed to the front door of his apartment with in 15 seconds considering his age and health condition. They also question the distance at which the woman admits seeing the victim being stab by his son, as it was implied that she must have not been wearing her glasses by the time she witness the crime.
The right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury is implicitly indicated in the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution. A jury is a panel of citizens who hear and render a verdict in a case that is being tried in the community. Juries hear and render verdicts on both Civil and Criminal cases. Currently, juror qualifications are the following; are at least 18 years of age, a United States Citizen, reside in the location of jury service, are able to read and write in English, have no disqualifying mental or physical condition. Disqualifications for juror selection include the following; felony conviction or felonious charges where the punishment can result in imprisonment for a year or more. In addition to, qualifications and disqualifications, exemptions exist for jury service that depends on the locality of the venue. Federally, jury exemptions are of the following; public officers, members of professional police and fire departments, and members who are active duty in the armed forces. In addition, local exceptions for jurors are of the following; over 70 years of age, primary caretaker of a person who is unable to care for himself or herself, guardians who have a child younger than 12 years of age, where the guardian service on the jury would require leaving the child without supervision, a student in public or private secondary school, a person enrolled and in actual attendance at a higher education institution. Fairness was not always permitted in regards to having chosen a jury present at hearings, in the early times prejudice was highly common. In the past, groups excluded from jury service such as women, African Americans, and those of Hispanic descent. Previous group exclusions are deemed unconstit...
In America, there is this thing called the jury system. The jury system is the process where a legal case is decided by a jury on the basis of evidence. The United states got the jury system from England. The jury system is made up The jury system is sort of a controversial topic in America. Many people ask is the American jury system still a good idea. I think it's still a good idea but there are still some doubt about it. A reason why it’s a good idea because of all the criminals that have been rehabilitated. Another reason is that many people find resolve in their cases when the plaintiff get what they needed, or the other person got what they deserved.
“Jury service is one of the most important civic duties you can perform. The protection of rights and liberties in federal courts largely is achieved through the teamwork of a judge and jury” (uscourts.gov). Conversely, often times people feel inconvenienced when they are summoned for jury duty rather than a privilege. When people have a negative impression on a matter, there can be a level of resentment, which in turn may lead to individuals not fully contributing in the decision making process of a jury. Jury duty is a privilege under the United States Constitution (Ferguson, 2013). The constitution is what gives the people of the U.S. their right, freedom, and liberty. The six amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense” (constitutioncenter.org). It is important to execute the U.S. Constitution as the Founding Fathers of the United States, intending to ensure the security of people’s rights, freedom, and liberty.
... up with a verdict for the accused person (Lamb, 2013). This is because the jury is filled with laymen who do not have any understanding of the law, and if they are allowed to deliberate on the evidence produced in court, then they may be misguided and may at many times find the accused person innocent while in the real sense they were guilty.
The quietness and patience juror 8 displayed caused tension amongst the other jurors creating careful and adequate (Flouri & Fitsakis, 2007, p.453) deliberations. Juror 8 's circle of influence (Covey, 2013) directly influenced the other jurors’ circle of concern (Covey, 2013) when forcing them to question their thought process. Juror 8 chose a collaborative negotiation (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p. 63) method when deliberating with the other jurors immediately handing down guilty verdicts for the defendant. Furthermore, juror 8 used his ACES to help the other jurors cross the creek (Budjac Corvette, 2007, p.
The next step involves the selection of twelve jurors. This requires that both prosecution and defense lawyers question potential jurors to hear, review the facts, and deem one innocent or guilty. When selecting the jury, attorneys may not discriminate against anyone (e.g. sex, nationality, cultures, etc.). All possible jurors must go through a series of questions. For example, an attorney may ask a juror if they agree with legalizing all forms of narcotics. In a drug case a potential juror that answers “yes” to legalize all forms of narcotics would not be suitable for an illegal narcotics case. Potential jurors may also be released without reason using the peremptory challenges clause.