6th Amendment Pros And Cons

When I think of the judicial system, I think of power and final decision making. In a sense, that concept can be scary. However, the judicial system by no means has as much power as one might think, and we can thank the Bill of Rights for that. Specifically, the 6th amendment is what protects us in a court of law. The 6th amendment sets boundaries and rules for trying and convicting a citizen of the United States, and that is why it is so beneficial to us. It has saved innocent people from corrupt accusations, it has convicted guilty people whom deny their crimes, it has helped America’s judicial system immensely, but it is not bullet proof or set in stone. There are loopholes, exceptions, and even exemptions. I hope that by the end of this

This historic living document is The Bill of Rights. It sets forth ten amendments granted to every American citizen. I want to take a more in depth look at the 6th amendment today, and break each word apart so that we may have a clear understanding of what the 6th amendment does for us. I would like to start just by giving you the general idea by reading some of its text. To quote the Bill of Rights provided by the U.S. constitutions website, “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…to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations…to be confronted with the witnesses against him…compulsory process for obtaining witnesses…to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” The exact text is somewhat implicit and quite blurry, so let’s dig

In similarity to all ten amendments, a living document changes to adapt to modern day. Therefore, it leaves us with exceptions, exemptions, and loopholes. In the Barker v. Wingo case, such loopholes become evident. It was September 15th, 1958 when the defendants, Willie Barker and Silas Manning, were indicted for the murder of an elderly couple. Law School Case Briefs informs us that, “The state had a stronger case against Manning so it planned to try Manning first so that he would then testify at Barker’s trial.” So, both Manning and Barker were arrested for the same crime, but Manning was going to be tried first due to stronger evidence against him and in hopes that Manning would testify at Barker’s trial. This would help the prosecutors convict both Manning and Barker. However, Manning’s conviction wasn’t that simple. Prosecutors ran into many difficulties which caused for many retrials. Finally, after six trials over 4 years, Manning was sentenced to life in prison. Keep in mind, Barker has been in jail waiting for a trial for four years now. The state scheduled trials many times, but only to request yet another continuance. On the 12th request for continuance in February of 1963, Barker finally put in a motion to dismiss indictment due to a violation of the speedy trial clause. The court denied this request, but Barker objected again on the 15th request for continuance. Once again, he was