Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
History of Criminal justice in america
History of Criminal justice in america
The history of jury
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: History of Criminal justice in america
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’. The modern US version of a jury derived from ancient English law. It is said in the early 11th century, William the Conqueror brought a form of a jury system from Normandy that became the basis for early England’s juries. It was constructed of men who were sworn by oath to tell the king what they knew. King Henry II then expanded on the idea by using a group of white men with good morals to not only judge the accused, but also to investigate crimes. King Henry II had panels of 12 everyday, law abiding men; this aspect of it is much like modern juries. The difference is that these early jurors were “self-informing”. This means that they were expected to already have knowledge of the facts that would be presented in court prior to the trial. King Henry II’s first jurors were assigned the job of resolving the land disputes that were occurring in England. ...
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
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.
In this essay I will compare and contrast the qualities and plights of both Aeneas and Gilgamesh. These two epic heroes share similar fates, yet are very different in personality.
The first American jury system began with the Pilgrims as early as 1620. In fact, the first jury trial was held in Massachusetts in 1630 (History of the Jury System in Massachusetts 1). In this trial, John Billington was on trial for the murder of John Newcomin. John Billington was found guilty and sent to the gallows. In 1641, Massachusetts determined that all “free men could serve on two juries in a year” (History of the Jury System in Massachusetts 2). Anyone who refused to serve on jury duty would be fined. This continues to be the consequence even today. It is important to note that “fre...
The importance of a jury makes it necessary to understand its function, strengths and weaknesses in a criminal matter. Both the state and federal courts follow the same procedure in impaneling the jury. Most states do not accord minors the right to jury trial in court proceedings related to juvenile delinquency. The jury essentially hears the evidence presented against the defendant and potential defenses. It will then weigh the evidence and ultimately determine if the evidence satisfies the criminal offenses that the defendant has been charged, beyond any reasonable doubt. Numerous and varied rules often surround the jury. The jury mainly focuses on criminal cases because these cases put a person’s liberty at risk. Defendants do not have a right to jury trial if their jail term does not exceed six months. All jurors need to recognize the fact that jury service is a critical duty of citizenship. They may also decide questions that involve crimes for which a trial judge fine, place on probation, or confine defendant to prison. Nevertheless, a jury does not play any role in sentencing, but instead leaves it upon the trial judge to make this decision following all the submissions made by both sides. Overall, the court system must rely upon a jury for the protection of liberty, life, and the pursuit of
Trial by Jury and Alternatives to It In order to decide whether or not trial by jury should or should not
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.
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.
The right to a trial by jury is one of the most fundamental concepts on which the American justice system rests. It had been in the English common law practice for several centuries and the American founders deemed in necessary to continue the practice and draft it into the United States Constitution. Prior to the Sixth Amendment, the Constitution guaranteed trial by jury for all crimes except impeachment. In 1968 the Supreme Court solidified this right in Duncan v. Louisiana stating that juries are a necessary check to g...
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.
There are two main characters, Gilgamesh and Agamemnon, who share some of the same values, while contradicting in others. Gilgamesh, as two-thirds a god and one-third a men, has taken upon journey in look for the eternal life, wile fighting with his conscience. Agamemnon, commander-in-chief of the Greek army, attacked Troy with the motif of revenge for his brothers honor, having different conscience and laws around him, which developed certain actions.
Trial by jury is perceived as a fair and unbiased manner to determine guilt or innocence of an accused. There are numerous drawbacks to a trial by jury. Jurors have little to no training in the matters of the law, they are only required to know the facts of the case. Judges guide the juries, and aid them in deterring which facts are admissible or inadmissible. Through this lack of legal knowledge, jurors are easily persuade by either side of the opposition. They are not able to use their own discretion, for they are influenced by the prosecution and defendants, as well as the judge. Jurors are also likely to follow the majority verdict, rather than coming to an independent verdict that may extend the duration of the trial.
Mention the pros and cons of our jury system and possible alternatives of it. Also, identify the group dynamics of the jury members
Agamemnon is the first play of Aeschylus’ trilogy, the Oresteia. Aeschylus was the first of Athens’ three great tragedians; the others: Sophocles; Euripides. The Oresteia was also the first Greek tragedy trilogy written. As Greeks of this epoch focused on humanist ideas, so did Aeschylus. He devoted his genius to serious contemplations of humanistic questions, such as the nature of justice. Other humanistic values are honor, truth, compassion, loyalty, devotion to family and gods. He credits much of his success to Homer’s epics. It is helpful to have read both the Iliad and the Odyssey to understand the Oresteia. I will relate some background information from Homer’s epics as I recount a summary of Aeschylus’ Agamemnon.
...und the fighting circle before finally killing him. These similarities further show how The Aeneid is written to The Iliad. Finally, The Iliad deals with the events leading to, but not including, the fall of Troy. The Aeneid deals with the events leading to, but not including, the rise of Rome and the fall of Greece. Therefore, The Aeneid is written to The Iliad.