This is the reason why juries and jury systems were established, so that an ordinary citizen can partake in convictions and the responsibility
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.
Having an all-white jury is not a jury of your peers; this jury was mad at
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
Every citizen has the right to vote, but not everyone does these days. It’s important that all people vote in the country and compulsory voting will assure that, because voting is not just a right, it’s a responsibility like Jury duty. Throughout the history voting laws had changed from time to time and from country to country and till now 30 countries around the world had used compulsory voting and got effective results and their countries developed due to good elections that were built in people’s opinion. Voting is considered like paying taxes nowadays, even though it is a responsibility and a duty for them to do towards their country, some people support it and others don’t. The advocates of the compulsory voting argue that
As the ideals of jurors being high and trustworthy are not always upheld due to the occasional bad juror, majority verdicts are a better technique of ensuring fair and just
Citizen Required To Serve? Jury a group of citizens sworn to give a verdict in a legal case on the basis of evidence submitted to them in court. Being able to serve on a jury is an absolute privilege to do for some and one thing that makes this country very different and unique from others. Serving on a jury should not be required for citizens. Some people believe serving on a jury should be a requirement for every citizen.
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.
Mr. Gilmer would have said it’s the jury duty to convict Tom Robinson for what he has done. That Mayella will never know peace until Tom is hung for his crimes. That with Tom running free no women would be safe. He would want to play up the stereotypes of savage black man that can’t be trusted with white women, because that would hit home with the men on the jury. This tact Mr. Glimer hopes to distract them from the lack of facts.
Because of this many of the jurors in Twelve Angry Men felt inconvenienced when they had to do jury duty. Juror Seven lets it be known at the beginning of the play that he doesn’t want to be there. He tells everyone,”This better be fast. I’ve got tickets to ‘The Seven Year Itch’ tonight” (Rose 313-314). This shows that many people would think that going to a play was more important than deciding whether a 19-year-old should die or live.
This argument could have been justifiable only if the juror has some proofs of the argument to be true. 3) Juror 3: i) He generalized the kids of the new generation to be bad just because he had such one experience from his son. This is Hasty Generalization fallacy. ii)
The serious lack of voter turnout contradicts this responsibility. There are individuals who speculate that it would be beneficial to make voting mandatory, with repercussions for those who do not vote. At the beginning of the course, I had believed that voting should be made mandatory. I thought that it would inspire people to vote, and would increase the numbers of turnout that way.
I think that I would like to be on a jury and experience what is required of a juror, I think everyone should be a member of the jury at least once in their lifetime. Having to experience the juries’ duties on a civil or criminal case, in some instance would be hard. Especially in a murder case involving children or battered women. When the judge gives you direction to please disregard that statement. How can you disregard information that you have heard?
Juvenile Justice Issues In today’s society the youth generation seems to be facing some problems that there is no solution for. Juveniles are participating in many wrongdoing activities that they are not being held accountable for. I see many gray areas when it comes to the juveniles justice system and I strongly believe there should be changes made in order to help these juveniles be deterred from such behavior so they do not continue down a path that can affect the rest of their lives.
In this paragraph, the advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury will be discussed. The main advantages are that juries introduce community values into the legal process and can influence the system (Joyce, 2013); they can achieve a sense of equity and fairness without enforcing unjust laws; in addition, juries are independent and neutral (Davies, 2015). Moreover, they guarantee participation from the public in a democratic institution (Hostettler, 2004), and represent the population thanks to the randomness with which jurors are decided (Davies, 2015). On the other hand, the most important disadvantages are that jurors have no prior contact with the courts, no training (Hostettler, 2004) and therefore they lack knowledge of law, courtroom proceedings (Joyce, 2013), and lack of ability to understand the legal directions (Thomas, 2010). Moreover, they must face evidence which is highly technical (Hostettler, 2004).
