More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on advantages and disadvantages of a jury system
Essay on advantages and disadvantages of a jury system
Advantages and disadvantages of the jury system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Anyone who has ever worked hard has heard the saying, “It builds character.” For example, say someone went to college. They worked hard to graduate with a degree, and finally got their dream job. Two months in they get laid off. Their first job is gone, but still must move on.
Jurors should not know anything about a specific case and not follow public affairs and read the news (Doc F). When a person is selected to be part of a jury, they have to say an oath stating that they will not use their emotions to determine the verdict of a trial. If a juror is caught using their emotions, they will be fined for a crime called perjury. Since there are twelve people in a jury, there is a variation of opinions when the jury decides a verdict. But, a judge is more professional and knows how to only use the evidence provided and be less biased.
A grand jury is composed of twelve people, to determine if there is enough evidence to send an accused individual to trial. Although they may not determine if the accused individual is guilty or not, they can issue a formal document saying there is enough evidence for the prosecutor to take the accused to trial also known as an indictment. According to, Texas Politics Today, “a grand jury may return indictments simply because the district attorney asks them to.” Which in the end is not fair, because the jury may believe that there is not enough sufficient evidence, but because they feel pressured they issue an indictment.
Based on results, less than two percent of civil and criminal cases are heard by jurors. (Doc. A) Our jury system is excelling because these are only serious cases that are being heard by our American Jury System which means we can be very selective in our jury members. In most criminal cases, defendants agree to a guilty plea or a plea bargain.
Our jury system stretches all the way back in England hundreds of years ago. Whenever a crime was committed in a community, a judge and his or her jury would come together to put the accused on trial. The judge served more as the legal expert over the trial. However, the jury was made up of twelve men who lived in the area that the crime was committed. These ordinary citizens were the ones that decided the verdict of the case.
The jury may not be experienced enough and can make fatal mistakes. Not only are the jurors biased, they are inexperienced. As shown in cartoon 1, 2, and 3 (Document E), many of the jurors have no experiences with court and base their verdicts on factors other than what the lawyers are giving them. Examples such as the jurors being dogs, verdict based on appearance, and being distracted with other issues during the court trial. The juror is inexperienced and biased, while the judge is experienced with what is going around during a trial, and they have been trained to be able to see both sides of a story and decide on evidence and
Many of the jurors use logos, logic and reasoning, to lay out the evidence in a rational and concrete manner to convince him. An example is when 4th Juror lays out all of the evidence of the knife to convince 8th Juror with seven, linear, factual points. The reader and audience is meant to connect a sense of ethos, reliability or competence, to 8th Juror, as he is the only one who doesn’t, at first, seem to be clouded by ignorance, racism, disinterest, or any other characteristic that might cloud
Many jury instructions on the issue of the burden of proof invite nullification arguments. According to these instructions juries must find the defendant not guilty if the case has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Conversely the jury should find the defendant guilty if the case has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The permissive language "should" arguably allows juries to consider nullification arguments. It is also possible to receive a specific jury instruction on nullification, though most judges simply avoid the topic and do not tell jurors of their power to judge the fairness of the law and how it is applied as well as to judge the facts of a case.
Although the jury takes forever to make their final decision about the trial they still reurn back to their old ways. In other words, the jury almost changed, but the jury is still biased towards the
A group of juror comprising of 12 men from diverse backgrounds began their early deliberations with 11 of ‘guilty’ and 1 of ‘not guilty’ verdicts. Juror 8 portrayed himself as a charismatic and high self-confident architect. Initially, Juror 1 who played the foreman positioned himself as self-appointed leader of the team in which has led his authority to be challenged as his leadership style lacked in drive and weak. In the contrary, Juror 8 is seen as the emergent leader considering his openness to probing conversations while remaining calm. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking.
In “A Jury Of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspell, Mr. Wright is found dead in his home with a rope around his neck. Mrs. Wright is the prime suspect, as she acts calm and seems unphased by the incident, though she is fully aware of her husband’s death. When men come to investigate they bring along Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters, and while the women are waiting they find interesting evidence. Although at first glance Mrs. Wright does not seem capable of murder because of her calm demeanor, Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale conclude she strangled her husband to death as evidenced by the crazily sewn quilt patch, mutilated canary, and unhinged birdcage.
Although some measures are taken to prevent this, many jurors are still prejudiced toward certain subjects and unable make a justified decision. It is said that bringing ordinary citizens into the world of court and law will help them be able to understand the justice system and teach them how to make a candid and unbiased decision. However, most of the jurors that are chosen do not possess the knowledge and experience necessary in order to reach a neutral and equitable verdict with the information and time given.(counter-argument) Many juries have made many controversial decisions such as the infamous OJ Simpson murder case. The jury acquitted the defendant, but many believe that the jury was biased.
Whichever way you decide, the verdict must be unanimous. I urge you to deliberate honestly and thoughtfully. You are faced with a grave responsibility. Thank you, gentlemen” (Judges Voice). The jury enters the jury room and twelve men shuffle in.
As a race we always want to learn which is how I believed school was something that would always happen. When schools were first made they weren’t perfect. It took time for schools to evolve to the way they are now. Many people had to help evolve ours schools through the 1900s. However, schools really started making a statement in the 1950s.
This essay will briefly discuss the role of the jury and how it works, from the principle behind it, to the method with which members are selected, and to the powers available to jurors. Moreover, it will outline advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury, and it will point out a couple of ways which could ameliorate this type of trial. Trial by jury has been a part of the criminal justice system since the 12th century (Davies, 2015), it is considered an ancient right and a symbol of liberty (Hostettler, 2004). It creates no precedent and it can decide challenging cases equitably without making bad law, it also brings members of the public into the administration of justice and into an understanding of legal and human rights (Hostettler,
