Preview

Is The American Jury System Still A Goo

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
588 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Is The American Jury System Still A Goo
Is the American Jury System still a Good Idea?

Most countries in the world today do not use juries, and only a small percentage of cases in the United States are decided by juries. So why exactly do Americans have juries? What role do they play in our system? And does it make sense for modern America? The jury system arose in England hundreds of years ago. If there was a crime in the community, the accused were brought to trial before a judge and a jury. The judge presided over the trial and served as a legal expert. The jury was a group of twelve men who were from the area where the crime was committed. The jury would then heard the evidence and then they would decide whether the accused was guilty or innocent. These days we ask ourselves if twelve ordinary citizens really reach the best decisions or are bench trials a better idea? Many say that the trial by jury is one of our sacred cows – meaning something that people don’t like to criticize- but many state that if we’d long had trial by judge in criminal cases and were to suggest that his reasoned and professional judgment as to facts and inferences should be replaced by the blanket verdict of pretty well any twelve men and women cramped together for a period of time the one would rightfully find this unjust. The role of the jury service is to encourage self-governance and civil participation, the ones who benefit from the jury service are ordinary citizens. What is important about the jury system is that it ensures the people ultimate control in the legislative and executive branch. Citizens can participate in the legislative and executive branches by exercising their right to vote, the only way that they can participate in the judicial branch of government is because the jury service has special role. The jury system allows ordinary citizens to participate in a government judicial process. They have the ultimate control in the legislative and executive branches.
There are many cases that have

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    cja 344

    • 1286 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Jury nullification is a constitutional doctrine that allows juries to acquit defendants who are technically criminals guilty, but who do not deserve punishment. It occurs in a trial when a jury reaches a verdict contrary to the judge 's instructions as to the law. A jury verdict contrary to the letter of the law does not belong only to the particular case before it. If a pattern of acquittals, however, develops in response to repeated attempts to prosecute a statutory offense, it can have the de facto effect of invalidating the statute. A pattern of jury nullification may indicate public opposition to an unwanted legislative enactment. In the past, it was feared that may unduly influence a judge alone or a panel of public officials to follow established legal practice, even if such practice had drifted from its origins. In most modern Western legal systems, however, often instruct juries only serve as "finders of facts", whose role is to determine the veracity of the evidence, and the weight accorded to evidence, to implement these tests the law and reach a verdict, but not decide what the law is .…

    • 1286 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The jury system is simply a system in which the verdict in a legal case is decided by a group of twelve regular citizens(the jurors). A lot of questions have been asked about the validity and importance of the jury system. I think the jury system is not a good idea and should therefore be removed because the jurors sometimes do not consider or even understand the evidence provides. They often let their personal feelings affect their verdict, or base it on unreasonable factors, and…

    • 448 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juries are a fundamental institution within Canadian law and decide a large portion of important cases, changing many lives. Considering that a jury is simply a group of citizens who appeared to be the right fit for jury duty on a list, do we place too much power in their hands? This paper looks at the jury’s power of nullification and why it should or should not continue to be a part of the Canadian justice system and if it should, how can we improve it? Drawing on real cases and scholarly journals this paper will attempt to address some major points on this issue. First of all, what exactly is jury nullification and how is it used in Canadian courts? Also what are the strengths and weaknesses of nullification and how have we seen these in…

    • 2637 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Latimer Mock Trial

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The rules of criminal procedure are highly significant to the defendants because they are designed to guarantee the constitutional rights and freedoms to those individuals charged with an offence. They serve to truly protect the victims, and ensure the guilty are brought to justice. In criminal trials, individuals in the jury wielded real power in the trial since they settle the fate of their fellow citizens by determining the defense is whether they are guilty of some of the most horrendous crimes. Being a member of the jury, my predominant responsibility in the mock trial was listening to the evidence presented by the Crown and the defense carefully. The jury was expected to examine all the evidence deliberately and make judgement without any bias. In order to make the discussion about the trial confidential, the jury were adjourned to the outside of the room to make a decision. An unanimous was made by the jury in order for a verdict to be reached. In this mock trial, the jury decided that Latimer shall be given a sentence of seven years. This decision made by the jury reflects the values and standards of the general public that Latimer do not deserve a more severe sentence. By bringing ordinary citizens into the court and placing them at the very heart of the decision-making process, trial by jury has become the most democratic part of the legal system. Furthermore, I experienced that the court uses witness testimony in an attempt to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the offense. During cross-examination, the Crown and the defense asked questions trying to detect falsehood of the testimony or to destroy the credibility of the opponent’s witnesses. By asking questions connected to the witnesses’ characters, the defense…

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jury Trial Research Paper

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The advantage of having a trial by jury allows a sort of "second trial." For example, in the movie Twelve Angry Men, every single jury member voted guilty, except for one. The other eleven men demanded his reasons for voting Not Guilty, and he gave them. In the end, they voted Not Guilty unanimously. Now, the defendant in question was charged with murder, to which the penalty was death by electrocution. However, the evidence, which most of the jury members did not question, was not as sound as they thought, and the man that voted Not guilty showed them that. If the defendant hadn't had a jury, then he would have been sentenced to death, whether he was guilty or not, due to the meager and circumstantial evidence…

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The jury system has been used in the criminal trial since the Constitution stated “the trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury.” The jury system has since been used in Australian courts with the aim of effectively achieving justice in the criminal trial by allowing peers to judge the accused. The jury system is effective in upholding the rights of the defendant and society. Recent reforms have also led to a more time and cost-effective way of using a jury as the third party in the adversary system. The Jury Act 1977(NSW) states “in any criminal proceedings in the Supreme Court or the District Court that are to be tried by jury, the jury is to consist of 12 persons.” The jury system that was formalised by the act has created an effective means of achieving justice in the criminal trial process. 12 persons randomly selected from society represent the communities’ standards and values as well as bringing a diversity of life experience to the judgment. By using people from society, the jury system effectively upholds society’s right to keep a check on the on-goings of court and prevents the legal system becoming distinct from society – this in turn, increases the public confidence with the criminal trial process. Also, the responsibility of the judgment of guilty or not guilty is made by twelve of the accused peers instead of one, reducing the impact of…

    • 1314 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Explain how a jury is summoned and selected, including the constitutional limitations on these processes.…

    • 938 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    By making decisions regarding the interest of the society the courts assume responsibilities that belong exclusively to the legislative and executive branches of government. The Supreme Court justices may rule based on what is in their best interest while saying that they are deciding for the good of the society. Moreover, when the Supreme Court justices are appointed, not elected, they may not be the representatives of the public’s view. As a result, judges begin making policy decisions about social or political changes society should make and become “unelected legislators.” By freely interpreting the meaning of the Constitution, the communities’ confidence in the Supreme Court will be undermined. When judicial activism in the Supreme Court wields too much power, it can eventually destruct the essence of…

    • 758 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This puts the power into a mass collective of people instead of one leader. The guarantee of a trial also ensures that people cannot be put in jail without first getting to plead their case. Our judicial system requires that you are innocent until proven guilty, and having a large jury ensures that one person cannot be the one who dictates your fate. One example of why this is so effective can be seen by taking a look at colonial America. When provided a jury at his case, John Adams proved that British soldiers were not guilty of murder. This was shocking. Although these soldiers were hated by the people and the judges of the town, the jury proved them not guilty. This scenario may have panned out differently if only one leader was to decide their fate. By providing people with a jury, this separates power unto a group of people to eliminate any chance of…

    • 535 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jury Nullification

    • 821 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This is a source of much debate in today’s society. Some maintain that it is an important safeguard or last resort against wrongful punishment and imprisonment; while others often view it as a violation of the right of a jury and undermining that law. Jury nullification occurs rather infrequently, in just three to four percent of cases, which shows that in most cases the law is justly applied.…

    • 821 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Jury Trial

    • 670 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Having a Jury Trial is known to be a part of the Adversarial System. Which is when exhibits, evidence, and witnesses are assembled by representatives of one side or the other to convince the fact finder that their side’s viewpoint is the truer one. Contrasted to that approach is the inquisitorial approach, used in mostly Europe. In this approach the Judge is given more control over the proceedings. The judge will interrogate the disputing parties and witnesses, referring frequently to a dossier that the court prepared. The Jury Trial is held to get a less biased decision and also a more truthful one. A trial gives attorneys more motivation to present the jury with all the evidence of the case, with a final goal of the jury ultimately…

    • 670 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Crimes that jurors believed to necessitate a more thorough investigation would be investigated for a longer period of time. The jurors essentially determined the level of detail of the investigation. This gave the jury the ability to make a personal decision of guilt or innocence based on how they felt about the accused. Langbein continues, writing, “In an eerie way, therefore, adjudication in Chancery wound up replacing the fundamental failing of common law procedure: Chancery procedure isolated the judge from the facts. Delegation of functions by an overburdened Chancellor came to have much of the same effect that bifurcation had produced in medieval common law. other were systems of adjudication in which the judge was unable to adjudicate fact.” The judge virtually held no power in a system with a self-informed jury. Therefore, the juries of medieval England were able to decide for themselves the guilt or innocence of the accused based purely on their understanding of right and wrong, as well as their understanding of the law itself. In this sesne, juries were able to determine to society which crimes were more likely to get harsher punishments. This, in turn, led to a set of social norms that was…

    • 1348 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Trial By Jury

    • 1319 Words
    • 6 Pages

    It isn’t arduous to see why some may question the efficiency of trial by jury and whether it should, and is able to, continue to discover innocence or guilt. Regarding the trial of Vicky Pryce, the failure of the jury within the hearing conjured ridicule and disdain from the judge and the media. The case deeply unsettled the trust of many in the system. The eight women and four men were dismissed after illustrating “fundamental deficits of understanding” (Jacobson, Hunter & Kirby, 2015, p. 55). Their profuse questions for the judge were deemed as unintelligent and unnecessary and so a costly re-trial was required. Consequently, this ordeal provoked a stronger desire for the abolition of trial by jury, to be replaced by a single judge as a more…

    • 1319 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    American Jury System

    • 148 Words
    • 1 Page

    Chynicka, I agree with your discussion piece regarding the American jury system. Allowing American citizens the ability to take part in jury service participation allows Americans to maintain an expressed impact on our legal system (Klein, 2015). As trial by jury continues to be a work in progress, it is not based around the legal knowledge and full comprehensive understanding of criminal laws (Jury, 2017). Nonetheless, a basic understanding of the crime or crimes that a defendant has been charged with committing is provided to jurors, it is not a jurors position to deliver a verdict based on anything expect the facts and supportive evidence presented during trial. Moreover, I do not believe that the question in play should be the jury…

    • 148 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    A jury is only used in a small percentage of criminal cases. Juries sit in the crown court and their roles in criminal cases are to listen to the evidence from both prosecution and the defendant, after they do this the point of law and to decide the facts of the case. At the end of the trial they retire to the jury room and discuss the case in secret and, if possible, come to an agreed decision. They do not have to give any reasons…

    • 855 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics