ipl-logo

Bias In The Court System

726 Words3 Pages

Court System Controversy
Although there is a standard for courtrooms and how they should function it is, nevertheless, unrealistic and unable to be upheld due to bias, prejudice- either conscious or subconscious, and stereotyping.
Initially, bias is using personal experiences to hold strong emotions toward a variety of groups of people. Bias can affect the court system in countless ways. For example, an individual may connect to the person on trial by race, gender, ethnicity or commonality between the defendant and someone from their personal life. May also occur with events and situations being discussed on trial. Author Veronica Roth stated that “no matter how smart, people usually see what they 're already looking for, that 's all”, and this applies to the justice system in the sense that looking past the biases is and always will be difficult because one tends to ignore evidences because of overwhelming emotions from bias (Roth). It is ideal to have impartial jurors whom will seek to be fair and will endeavor to correct potential bias in the courtroom in themselves, but it is not logical.
Secondly, conscious prejudice is strong emotion towards or against, in this case the defendant on …show more content…

Finally, stereotypes are continually damaging society, but more so the justice system. Stereotypes allow the jurors to feel that using the hasty generalization fallacy is a proper argument, along with bandwagoning on the ideas of other simple minded men and women who categorize groups of individuals. This bias works like the rest; “if the emotion is consistent with the stereotypes … then those negative emotions are likely to exacerbate implicit biases”, causing an impartial jury and unfair ruling (Implicit Bias In a Courtroom). The common stereotypes, as random and wild as they may seem, can be mistaken as for logic and evidence against the defendant. The more common and widespread the stereotype, the more acceptable it may appear to not only jurors but to many in the

Show More
Related
852 Words | 4 Pages

On the 14th of October 2011, Mr Rayney had submitted an application for a trial which only involved a judge without a jury present. This was due Mr. Rayney assuming that a strong bias had been manifested pre-trial as a result of the subjective publicity revolving around the death of his wife, Corryn(The Conversation, 2012). Therefore, the jury and any member of the public would already have preconceived views in favour of Mr Rayney being guilty of murdering his wife. The trial was successful for Mr Rayney where he was acquitted of murdering his wife. Similarly, this issue is somewhat common as it had also occurred in the case Evans v The State of Western Australia [2011] WASCA 182, in which both appellants had made appeals after being convicted for murder.

Read More
462 Words | 2 Pages

When people think of a good judge they typically think of somebody who is fair, not bias and has some sort of experience. However, in today’s society, particularly in the United States, our judicial selection methods are not made to select judges on their ability to reason well and rule impartially (Carter and Burke, 6). On top of that, judges have no actual training before they become part of the judiciary. The only training they receive is in school when they are studying the law. Sometimes when they pursue an apprenticeship with a judge they also get a little bit more experience or insight into a judge’s job.

Read More
842 Words | 4 Pages

The jury system has cases where jurors are influenced by the media because it is almost impossible to find someone who has not heard about the case and formed a personal opinion already (Doc F). In widely known cases, jurors may have been influenced by outsiders and the media indirectly and directly. For example, in the People vs. O.J. Simpson case, the infamous decision might have been made because of the jurors discussing the case with people who they are not suppose to discuss it with. An argument can be made that jurors are specifically instructed not to discuss the case or read anything about it, but there is no way to verify that the jurors are actually following this rule. Jurors can also have personal bias because they are very different from the defendant or prosecution (Doc E).

Read More
844 Words | 4 Pages

This may cause the jury to be indecisive between what the actual case and what the media portrays it to be. The amount of media released for cases creates a negative impact within the courts and makes it difficult for a fair trial. When juries are uncertain about a case or a suspect, they result to social media platforms and news coverage that will provide them with more information and depth into the case. ‘’But if the case unfolds in the media, by the time a case gets to court, the supposedly impartial jury (or even the judge) may have already heard information and allegations (not admissible by court standards) that have caused them to seriously prejudice the parties’’. (Nedim, 2014).

Read More
1005 Words | 5 Pages

Stereotypes are simple images or beliefs over the attributes assigned to a particular social group, are models of behavior that become schemes deeply rooted in our mentalities to the point that we adopt them as part of human naturalness. Stereotypes can be racial, religious, sexual and social. These could be the caused of a known incident or attitude years earlier, or simply the result of frequent rumors. Stereotypes can affect different spheres of society. These assumptions can filter into many aspects of life.

Read More
1133 Words | 5 Pages

The Film 12 Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, is a film written about the American jury system. In the film, as in any part in life, emotions are a tricky thing; This is especially true for the 3rd, 7th, and 8th jurors. One of the main themes in the film questions that of the emotions of the jurors. That question is: Is it possible to keep personal prejudice and emotions out of a trial? Is this even a good or bad thing?

Read More
1186 Words | 5 Pages

Twelve Angry Men is in many ways a love letter to the American legal justice system. We find here eleven men, swayed to conclusions by prejudices, past experience, and short-sightedness, challenged by one man who holds himself and his peers to a higher standard of justice, demanding that this marginalized member of society be given his due process. We see the jurors struggle between the two, seemingly conflicting, purposes of a jury, to punish the guilty and to protect the innocent. It proves, however, that the logic of the American trial-by-jury system does work.

Read More
803 Words | 4 Pages

This process continues throughout the course of the movie, and each juror’s biases is slowly revealed. Earlier through the movie, it is already justifiable to label juror 10 as a bigoted racist as he reveals strong racist tendencies against the defendant, stating his only reason for voting guilty is the boy’s ethnicity and background. . Another interesting aspect of this 1957 film is the “reverse prejudice” portrayed by juror

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

In "twelve angry men," we can see how prejudice has its own way with the cloak of justice. Personal prejudice is most strongly evident in the characters of Juror #3 and Juror #10. At the beginning of story, Juror #3 immediately claimed that the case was simple and the defendant’s guilt was obvious. Although he was not a new juror and ought to be experienced

Read More
1089 Words | 5 Pages

All Asians are good at math, all blondes are dumb, all Muslims are terrorists - these are all common stereotypes. Without even realizing it, stereotypes have undeniably played an enormous role in individual lives. Minds seem to already set a certain image in them based on the people they encounter. People judge others by their skin tone, ethnicity, and physical appearance unconsciously, and this have been proven by many social experiments. Of course, though these stereotypes might be accurate at times, there are situations where they are completely defied.

Read More
729 Words | 3 Pages

The play “Twelve Angry Men” shows that relying on twelve people for a life sentencing situation could be bad for the justice system. The justice system could be bad in at least three ways by people being biased, fighting for the wrong side, and people having no common sense. Usually others opinions cause the justice system to be worse than it has to be. A danger of relying on twelve individuals in a court system means that there are some that would be biased about the case. Juror 5 was biased for relating this case to himself because he was from the slums and so was the boy on trial.

Read More
429 Words | 2 Pages

Courts prove unsuccessful in achieving social change due to the constraints on the court’s power. Rosenburg’s assessment that courts are “an institution that is structurally challenged” demonstrates the Constrained Court view. In this view, the Court’s lack of judicial independence, inability to implement policies, and the limited nature of constitutional rights inhibit courts from producing real social reform. For activists to bring a claim to court, they must frame their goal as a right guaranteed by the constitution, leading to the courts hearing less cases (Rosenburg 11). The nature of the three branches also creates a system of checks and balances in which Congress or the executive branch can reverse a controversial decision, rendering the Court’s impact void.

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

This may cause a judge to render a decision based on obligation instead of holding true to their beliefs. This pressure is not easily felt as intensely by appointed judges, especially those with lengthy terms. In considering the equity of the pros and cons it is my opinion that the existing system in place works best. Every system is flawed.

Read More
826 Words | 4 Pages

With judicial isolation it risk the likelihood of judges having a one sided view due to the fact they are more of specialist type of judge rather than a generalist

Read More
1232 Words | 5 Pages

These people are dangerous and don’t need big reason to kill someone.(This is an example of Prejudice too) Perception Discussion of elevated train (0:18:05) Could hear the argument (0:19:24) Discussion of lady's testimony (1:21:21) In all three situations Jurors organizes the information and translates it into something meaningful and comes to conclusion which results into making others to switch their vote from guilty to not guilty.. Representativeness heuristic "

Read More

More about Bias In The Court System

Related Topics

Open Document