Jury Trial Research Paper
Bench trial vs. Jury trial
High profile cases being spread through the media attracting massive attention. Cases such as the Sean Bell shooting, Amadou Diallo, and these trials were spread all throughout television which sometimes doesn’t fall in the favor of the defendant. There are two types of trials a bench trial also known as a court trail and a jury trial. NYS procedural law 260.10, states that every criminal depending on the crime must be trialed with 12 randomly selected jurors. The bench trial is another term for a judge trial without the jurors. The bench trial is conducted in this fashion; both parties present their evidence or make their opening statement. After the plaintiff finishes presenting his evidence, the defendant presents …show more content…
Mr. Simpson was on trial for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson had a team of defense attorneys on his side, most famous being Johnny Cochran. He came forth with the famous line “if the gloves don’t fit, you must acquit”. The jurors found the verdict to be not guilty on all charges. This impacted the case in a huge way. People say that O J walked due to the fact that it was a jury trial, he was a famous football star and actor with many fans. Due to the fact that he was a celebrity, he probably had fans within the jurors which were a huge advantage for him. Even though he was found not guilty on all charges doesn’t make him innocent. A jury trial has many pros and cons. 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
High profile cases being spread through the media attracting massive attention. Cases such as the Sean Bell shooting, Amadou Diallo, and these trials were spread all throughout television which sometimes doesn’t fall in the favor of the defendant. There are two types of trials a bench trial also known as a court trail and a jury trial. NYS procedural law 260.10, states that every criminal depending on the crime must be trialed with 12 randomly selected jurors. The bench trial is another term for a judge trial without the jurors. The bench trial is conducted in this fashion; both parties present their evidence or make their opening statement. After the plaintiff finishes presenting his evidence, the defendant presents …show more content…
Mr. Simpson was on trial for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson had a team of defense attorneys on his side, most famous being Johnny Cochran. He came forth with the famous line “if the gloves don’t fit, you must acquit”. The jurors found the verdict to be not guilty on all charges. This impacted the case in a huge way. People say that O J walked due to the fact that it was a jury trial, he was a famous football star and actor with many fans. Due to the fact that he was a celebrity, he probably had fans within the jurors which were a huge advantage for him. Even though he was found not guilty on all charges doesn’t make him innocent. A jury trial has many pros and cons. 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