ipl-logo

Jury System Dbq Essay

773 Words4 Pages

“Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything.” This quote stated by George Bernard Shaw represents America’s jury system perfectly. We should ultimately eliminate the jury system from court, and use the bench system in all criminal and civil cases. Although there are many reasons why eliminating the jury system is a better choice, many people want to keep the jury system only because we have used it for a long time and they fear change. Without change, progress is impossible and those who want to keep the jury system should change their mind. The bench system should replace the jury system in all criminal cases because it is more accurate, it is less costly, and it is time efficient. …show more content…

When finding a jury system, the court attempts to find twelve adults that are unbiased to decide the fate of the defendant. If we lived in a perfect world, that would work but we do not. Almost everybody has an opinion on certain topics that revolve around a case including the death penalty and their own experiences. A jurors will always be biased no matter what they put down when filling out their form. For example, in the 2008 court case, the verdict of the jury stunned the public making many raged and confused (Document D). 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 …show more content…

During the Boston Bombing trial, the court system retrieved three thousand citizens of Boston to be surveyed. It took those months to get the twelve adults they needed which is a really long time. In those three months where they were choosing a jury, they could have already completed the trial and the verdict would have been reached much quicker. Instead of waiting months for the jury to be selected, they could have rolled with one or two judges, three at max, to decide on the case. Juror selection is a long and complicated process that requires patience, money, and time. Why spend months trying to find a costly, inexperienced group of people when having a judge is much more

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
1254 Words | 6 Pages

1.0 Introduction Section 80 guarantees the right to trial by jury. The Queensland Jury Act 1995 provides the current legislation which decrees that all trials on indictment must be by jury. In the ninety years since this legislation was passed, an increase of trial complexity has occurred, leaving many jurors with the inability to comprehend the information and evidence procured in a trial. This proceeds to make lay juries ineffective and unreliable. To remedy the situation, specialised juries should be introduced to minimize the amount of incorrect verdicts, misunderstandings in court, jury misconduct, and avoidance of jury duty.

Read More
1046 Words | 5 Pages

The fragility of it is that you can be put on a jury full of people who don’t care about your fate, and through unlucky means be accused of something that you didn’t do. People decide your faith, and you can’t expect those on the jury to react in a completely unbiased way. Juror seven likewise, does not care about the fate of the boy, dismissing the case in a blink of an eye, with his only desire was to attend the baseball game. Clearly unfit for jury duty, he was willing to sacrifice the life of a potentially innocent boy. It can’t be known whether a jury will consist of biased or unbiased people, those convicted have no control of such matters.

Read More
557 Words | 3 Pages

1.Intro The jury system for Australia is not a fair system. There are many fault with the structure of how it is decided and how is picked. The jury should be 100% fair and not biased in any way, if this is not the case a criminal or civil offences could be charged for the wrong thing. Some reasons why the jury system is not a fair system is because Ordinary people may not understand complex legal technicalities, some people are exempt from serving, the jury is not a true cross-section of society and also It is difficult for people to remain completely impartial, especially if they are influenced by the media coverage of the trial.

Read More
125 Words | 1 Pages

Critics try to counter by saying that jury nullification is a bad method because juries are not experienced and trained as police and prosecutor are. The thing is though juries are useful exactly because they are not trained to know the law. They are a common sense point of view because they are not affected by restricting law. Such a common sense point of view is necessary to properly balance the rule of law with the fair application of justice—because a purely legal approach made by lawyers and judges can often result in harsh results. That is why it is important to have another party whose views can be different from judges and lawyers to have the power to counter the wrongness made by them.

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
701 Words | 3 Pages

Lastly, because appointing jurors does not cost much to the government, a wide variety of people are present regardless of prejudice or bias they may have, the jury system is effective as varying views are

Read More
647 Words | 3 Pages

This was determined from way back when America was first being created. Originally the U.S was control by the British but one of the main reasons for our independences from them other than the fact that the U.S. did not like their high taxes but also was because the jurors and their rights. According to the video “Annenberg Classroom: Juries” when a judge did not like the juries verdicts they were fine and threatened to have their nose cut off. American wanted their judicial to be fair and equal for all. However, they are wrong in the fact that all citizens should need to serve on the jury because people will misuse this power and will not truly understand their effect on the case and more importantly the people live on trail.

Read More
1245 Words | 5 Pages

It truthfully followed the Federal Judicial procedure of procuring a jury that could be used in a court of law. While the utilization of jury consultants had been dramatized, the film demonstrated the role of a jury consultant in such a way that glorifies its usage. There may be a time and place for the use of jury consultants; however, until the disadvantages of its utilizations are recognized and rectified, it will remain a perversion within the judicial

Read More
736 Words | 3 Pages

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AMERICA'S JURY SYSTEM Eighteen out of one-hundred people are summoned for jury duty each year. Each jury member a normal person whose decisions are influenced by the world’s culture and affected by their busy schedules. Therefore, Americas jury systems are no longer effective in the twenty-first century, as a result of outside opinions, beliefs, and events taking place in our world. First, jury members in today's society don't have time to recall for jury duty. In fact, jury duty is often dreaded or avoided among Americans.

Read More
344 Words | 2 Pages

Jury Duty Jury duty is a very important obligation that every citizen of the United States has bestowed upon them. It is not only a responsibility, but a privilege to be able to serve on a jury. Jury duty is the most direct way to participate in the democracy and the legal system in the United States. Also, as was stated in the video that we watched in class, and then echoed by the person that I interviewed, it is important for the jury to consist of many different people with different backgrounds, and it is important that everyone in the community gets involved with the jury process.

Read More
1139 Words | 5 Pages

No. 8: I think that the jury system we have today has its own advantages and disadvantages. For example, a jury that consists of jurors who are biased could be manipulated by ‘outsiders’ through bribery or some jurors, as we have discussed before, might have some personal prejudices/beliefs that may affect their decision making. But there are some advantages as well because the decision that is made by the jury is thought out very carefully by a group of people. Interviewer: [gathers all his papers]

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
1576 Words | 7 Pages

The legal professionals in Japan were always against the jury trial system as they did not want lay people to involve in administering justice. Because of this, jury trial could never be popular in Japan. Beside this fact, according to some commentators and researchers, there was another reason for unpopularity of the jury trial system in Japan. The reason was, the defendants, who choose jury trial, had to give up their right to appeal on factual determination made by the jury. Although the acquittal rate in jury trial was higher than the bench trial, jury was less admired by the

Read More
1472 Words | 6 Pages

They have to decide important matters, verdicts, without giving reasons about their decision (Hostettler, 2004); they can nullify a verdict even if the evidence is overwhelming (Joyce, 2013). Furthermore, juries are too expensive, prolong the length of the trial (Davies, 2015) and the guilty can walk free, while the innocent is convicted (Joyce, 2013). In addition, jurors should be representative of society, but it is not

Read More

More about Jury System Dbq Essay

Related Topics

Open Document