ipl-logo

Anatomy Of A Jury By Seymour Wishman

891 Words4 Pages

Anatomy of a Jury, written by Seymour Wishman, is a captivating murder mystery set in 1982 in Essex County, New Jersey located in a tension filled criminal court. Anatomy of a Jury is a nonfiction novel that employs the research conducted by the University of Chicago Jury Project to investigate into the grueling process of selecting a jury for the trial of a criminal case. This could sound as if we are indulging into a book with two different premises from a quick glance. That is Seymour Wishman’s point that he is trying to get at by doing so. Seymour Wishman, a renown criminal lawyer, wanted a chance to inform the public about the captivating institution of the jury selection in American courts, but needed a platform in which to do so. Knowing …show more content…

Part One, titled “Who Shall Judge Me?” began following the police officer, who was the first to respond, to the scene of the crime. The scene he responds to turns out to be an unequivocally horrific murder of a young housewife and mother in their own home. After addressing the crime scene, Wishman pauses away for the first of numerous times to begin telling the story of the accurate legal steps that correspond to this crime. He depicts how a group of people are first summoned to appear as a juror, which is done by the prosecutor’s office sending out a large amount of prospective juror questionnaires. Everyone who receives a questionnaire must fill it out, or pay a monetary fine. The prosecutor’s office then reviews the questionnaires, and proceeds to issue summons for those prospective jurors who are qualified to serve. Unfortunately, this entire process could take months or even years in some …show more content…

The initial twelve jurors are chosen at random by the county clerk, who picks slips of paper with the perspective jurors’ names at random. Once the twelve jurors are selected, the lawyers begin the process of molding the jury to whom they specifically want. In Anatomy of a Jury, the defense attorney, Mike Bernstein, and the prosecutor, Leslie Ryan, begin this process, which is called Voir-Dire. Here, the lawyers can ask the selected jury any question they desire to try and untangle whether jurors will find the defendant guilty or not guilty. Some Lawyers even bring in social scientists to help them figure out which way jurors will lean. The judge on the other hand, has a set list of questions they must ask the jurors. The only requirement for eliminating jurors during the Voir- Dire is that no juror can be excused based on race. The attorneys each have a set amount of preemptory excuses they can use as well, with which they can excuse jurors

Show More
Related
515 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
776 Words | 4 Pages

A jury is not trained to decide someone’s fate, which is why a judge, as a trained lawyer, should choose the

Read More
1247 Words | 5 Pages

A juror that was very vulnerable to the pressure was Juror 2. He lacks diction, and seems weak in his beliefs. When the men are asked to share their opinions he says, “Well, it’s hard to put into words. I just-think he’s guilty” (Rose 14). Contrary to the second juror, the third jurors resents being pressured by his peers.

Read More
1285 Words | 6 Pages

Like the Electoral College, several of the plans made by the Founding Fathers have lost some of their practicality. What worked in the past does not always work in the future, and this is the case for the jury system. The sole reason it was created was to ensure that each citizen was guaranteed a fair trial, which was a main concern due to Britain’s monarchy. In modern times, however, the judicial branch of the United States could easily give every citizen a fair trial with only a judge presiding over the case. It is clear that bench trials are superior to trials by jury because the citizens on juries are unqualified or biased, its benefits do not outweigh its burdens, and its claim to encourage civic duty is false.

Read More
773 Words | 4 Pages

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

Read More
644 Words | 3 Pages

Guilty or not guilty, all citizens deserve a thorough trial to defend their rights. Formulating coherent stories from events and circumstances almost cost a young boy his life. In Twelve Angry Men, 1957, a single juror did his duty to save the life of an 18 year old boy by allowing his mind to rationalize the cohesive information presented by the court and its witnesses. The juror’s name was Mr. Davis, he was initially the only one of 12 jurors to vote not guilty in reason that the young boy, sentenced with first degree murder, may be innocent. I am arguing that system 1 negatively affects the jurors opinion on the case and makes it difficult for Mr. Davis to convince the other jurors of reasonable doubt.

Read More
842 Words | 4 Pages

Another reason citizens question juries is that they have bias from personal experience or the media. The defendant and the prosecution criticize the jury system because the actual jurors may not understand the situation from any point of view because they come from different lifestyles (Doc E). The American jury system is not a good idea anymore because juries are not experts in law, they have bias, and are not “a jury of peers”. Because jurors are not experts in law, they are subject to be

Read More
549 Words | 3 Pages

What if one day, twenty years from now you were chosen to discuss the fate of an eighteen year old boy. What would you do? Would you take your job and do it responsibly, or would you do it like some of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men and blow it off so you can finish early and leave. Even though there was a lot of controversy in that jury room, I noticed that Jurors 3,7, and 9 used their personalities, beliefs, and views of their responsibilities to bring the boy on trial to justice. This very excitable juror is the last to change his vote, and while his stubbornness could be seen as being based more on emotions than facts, he starts off with his little notebook with facts of the case and tries to insist that he has no personal feelings on the matter.

Read More
2057 Words | 9 Pages

Jury Systems and Racial Injustice Juries are the way we make sure trials are fair, but when your jury is biased the result of the trial are often inequitable. Today we do our best to make sure trials have impartial jurors, but this was not always the case. In the 1930’s, and a lot of other decades too, the right for African Americans to have an unbiased jury was not fulfilled. This caused many African Americans to be sentenced to death when they otherwise would not have been.

Read More
1254 Words | 6 Pages

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.

Read More
591 Words | 3 Pages

The justice system that relies on twelve individuals reaching a life-or-death decision has many complications and dangers. The play Twelve Angry Men, by Reiginald Rose, illustrates the dangers of a justice system that relies on twelve people reaching a life-or-death decision because people are biased, they think of a jury system as an inconvenience, and many people aren’t as intelligent as others. The first reason why Reiginald illustrates dangers is because people can be biased or they can stereotype the defendant. The Jurors in Twelve Angry Men relate to this because a few of them were biased and several of them stereotyped the defendant for being from the slums. The defendant in this play was a 19 year old kid from the slums.

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

‘Twelve Angry Men’ written by Reginald Rose, is based on the story of a jury who have to come together to determine the fate of a young boy accused to have murdered his own father. Initially, eleven of the jurors vote not guilty with one of the juror being uncertain of the evidence put before them. As the men argue over the different pieces of evidence, the insanity begins to make sense and the decision becomes clearer as they vote several other times. Rose creates drama and tension in the jury room, clearly exploring through the many issues of prejudice, integrity and compassion, in gaining true justice towards the accused victim. These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3.

Read More
1404 Words | 6 Pages

The script introduces the viewers to the typical behavior and the state of mind of these jurors, who surprisingly turn out to be the last to change their opinions from “guilty” to “not guilty”. Juror#3 the frustrated father whose personal conflicts and experiences influence his view of the accused’s crime is very desperate to make it clear that his mind is already made up before the deliberations even start. Similar

Read More
811 Words | 4 Pages

Injustice for Love Injustice can be caused by many things, hate, racism, fear, etc. But the feeling that connects all emotions, and even humans together is the one that can cause the most harm. If one is lucky enough, it can make one feel like they are in heaven, and people will go to hell to keep that feeling. That feeling that we all seek and desire is love. It can be argued it is the purpose for life, and some will end it to keep others Love is safe.

Read More
1472 Words | 6 Pages

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,

Read More

More about Anatomy Of A Jury By Seymour Wishman

Related Topics

Open Document