Jury Decision Making Essay
A jury is a body of citizens sworn to give a true verdict according to the evidence provided in a court of law by both parties. This verdict is given by the foreman who is appointed by other members of the jury. Other duties of the foreman involve asking questions on behalf of the jury and facilitating jury discussions. The verdict given by the foreman can be either guilty or not guilty as there is no such verdict as “innocent” and this is given after the hearing of the evidence.
The size of the jury varies. For example, in criminal cases, there are usually 12 jurors. However, in civil case trials, they may only require six jurors. Although in Scotland, there are 15. The majority for a verdict varies. In some cases it must be unambiguous, …show more content…
This was supported by Gordon who found that longer sentences were given to black people for crimes such as burglary whereas longer sentences were given to white people for crimes such as fraud. This is a disadvantage as it also shows that there are other factors that could influence jury decision making.
Juror characteristics can also have an influence on the decision made. Certain characteristics such as age, sex, race, social status, occupation, education etc. can be linked to the willingness to convict defendants. These characteristics are of interest to the defence and prosecution since lawyers in Britain and USA have the right to object to a limited number of potential jurors (peremptory challenges) and so may try to select a jury more sympathetic to their case.
It was found that jurors with previous experience of jury work were more likely to convict. This could be due to experience as well as the young jurors would be naïve and easily influenced by other factors. Also, the race of a juror was found to be a factor that could influence the decision made as they would be most likely convict defendants of a different race due to their prejudice against certain traits. Jurors with authoritarian personalities are more likely to convict due to their support for convention, police authority and their dogmatic approach. They believe in structure, law and order
The size of the jury varies. For example, in criminal cases, there are usually 12 jurors. However, in civil case trials, they may only require six jurors. Although in Scotland, there are 15. The majority for a verdict varies. In some cases it must be unambiguous, …show more content…
This was supported by Gordon who found that longer sentences were given to black people for crimes such as burglary whereas longer sentences were given to white people for crimes such as fraud. This is a disadvantage as it also shows that there are other factors that could influence jury decision making.
Juror characteristics can also have an influence on the decision made. Certain characteristics such as age, sex, race, social status, occupation, education etc. can be linked to the willingness to convict defendants. These characteristics are of interest to the defence and prosecution since lawyers in Britain and USA have the right to object to a limited number of potential jurors (peremptory challenges) and so may try to select a jury more sympathetic to their case.
It was found that jurors with previous experience of jury work were more likely to convict. This could be due to experience as well as the young jurors would be naïve and easily influenced by other factors. Also, the race of a juror was found to be a factor that could influence the decision made as they would be most likely convict defendants of a different race due to their prejudice against certain traits. Jurors with authoritarian personalities are more likely to convict due to their support for convention, police authority and their dogmatic approach. They believe in structure, law and order