ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Jury Duty

701 Words3 Pages

Juries according to dictionary.com consist of a group of people normally 12 individuals who are provided with facts about a court case in order to give a verdict. As a democracy, the United States has juries in certain cases in order to maintain law and order and for the right of freedom to be continually exercised by every American Citizen. Jury members are selected from a list based on their voter’s registration and or driver’s license to go through certain procedure to determine qualifications for jury duty. The procedure is called voir dire and persons who showcase bias, possible relation to the case, or are not fit to make decisions concerning the case are removed. Jurors are then given information on the case and get to listen to both sides of the case in order to make a conclusion. …show more content…

This ability is an advantage as it allows for citizens to make decisions on cases whether civil or criminal based on facts as well as the law submitted by the judge to be applied. Other advantages include; the limited power government officials have over one another as well as the public. The presence of a jury allows for there to be varying views which positively affect cases and reduces the risk of a tyranny. Jury duty allows for the public to be part of decisions normally made by government officials which impacts their decisions. It allows for citizens to have a say in the judicial branch of government which is a characteristic of a democracy. 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

Show More
Related
515 Words | 3 Pages

The Founding Fathers wanted the people of the United States to be in a democracy or self-government and established the jury system into the constitution. It is expensive and is a long process to start a jury trial. Also, jurors are not as professional as judges and can not determine a fair verdict. The Crime Scene Investigation (CSI) effect might also affect the verdict of the jury. The American jury system should not be used because of it not being cost-effective, the lack of experience of the jury, which leads to justice not being served, and the CSI effect impacting the

Read More
1186 Words | 5 Pages

However, the Court also noted that larger juries might be necessary in certain cases to ensure a fair trial. Despite the Court's rulings, some critics argue that a six-person jury is not large enough to provide an adequate representation of the community and that it may be more susceptible to biases and errors. However, others argue that smaller juries can be more efficient and can still provide a fair trial with proper safeguards and procedures in place. This is an important part of our lives because it helps ensure that people accused of crimes get a fair trial. Having a jury of a certain size can affect the outcome of a trial.

Read More
960 Words | 4 Pages

While this idea may seem logical, some people still argue that the court system should be based on facts and not emotion. However, like stated before, a jury works best if it takes into consideration the actual human side of the case, just like how juries ruled against slave laws in the 1800s. Summary As the case defending jury nullification draws to an end, it is evident that this legal practice is truly benefiting the American court system: Not only does jury nullification prevent unjust laws being enforced, but it also provides more reasonable punishments to criminals and controls the corruption happening in the courtroom.

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
1122 Words | 5 Pages

With twelve people judging a case, it is more likely that someone will have the sense and maturity to decide to put aside their own beliefs and only go with the facts. Thus, having a jury gives a better safety guard for the defendant. Yes, the media will often over-publicize a case, causing a possible bias in the jurors, but in the end in cases such as the one in Document D, the jury was able to put aside the media and do what is

Read More
661 Words | 3 Pages

The American Jury System offers the United States citizens an opportunity to be proven guilty or innocent when a crime has been committed. The twelve person jury system was established in England hundreds of years ago. Originally this system was made up of twelve men and this was huge because they had the power to go against what the judge wanted in court. There are many vital points as to why our American jury system is successful; jury trials by the numbers, ownership by jury members towards the accused, how reliable or unreliable evidence is viewed by jurors, gender balance and the detailed screening process in which jurors are selected.

Read More
946 Words | 4 Pages

“Observers of the American jury system have remarked on its ability to elevate ordinary citizens into self-governors.” (Document C, 293) Many people complain about the amount of government control that there is in America. This is one of the things that gives us a say in our government. This allows us to govern ourselves and work our hardest to choose the correct verdict for the case.

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
913 Words | 4 Pages

The American Jury System is a way for the people of the community to become involved in the judicial system. When court cases arise in some cases a jury will take place. The people on this jury make a decision on if the defendant is either guilty or innocent. This outcome has great power, and it's quite controversial if ordinary citizens should be able to make these big, influential decisions. The American Jury system should be kept because it is a staple of our democracy, allows citizens to be educated on the law, and produces fairer results for those who are accused.

Read More
647 Words | 3 Pages

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.

Read More
210 Words | 1 Pages

Trial jury is smaller in size compared to the grand jury, trial jury usually consists of 6-12 people. Trial jury, which is usually the type of jury we see televised, is usually open to the public, very strict, and controlled by a judge. Defendants usually are allowed to be present, as well as testify, and call witnesses if they choose to do so. A trial usually has no say so regarding the trial they are working on, usually the only thing they are allowed to do, is deliberate and come up with a final decision, also known as the verdict. The trial jury rules either in favor of the plaintiff or defendant.

Read More
705 Words | 3 Pages

A flawed jury is what makes for an unfair trial. Juries are a crucial piece of the puzzle which helps create the system we have today, one where it needs to be represented in the right way that makes the justice system an improved one. The judicial system is one where the jury needs to accurately represent the community that the accused resides in, achieving this can impact the community first hand, make it easier to protect the defendant from unfair sentencing, and promote public confidence in the justice system which is what lots of people distrust and lack in. The citizens in a community are the ones that get impacted from the actions of accused in the first hand which is why they need to be accurately shown in the jury.

Read More
981 Words | 4 Pages

The American Government is made up of three branches: judicial, legislative, and executive. Americans are very fortunate to have a judicial system in the United States, which is based on the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. The same problems still happen today in 2018 that happened in 1957 when the movie Twelve Angry Men by MGM was made. Common reasons jury duty is not popular include taking time off work, not getting the same amount of pay as if one is at work, and simply just not wanting to be there. People will always be biased from their own experiences.

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
451 Words | 2 Pages

Having a jury promotes a lesser miscarriage of justice as they usually do not favor the defendant, or place themself in the shoes of the one party during a trial. The jury can be one sided whether it is with the defendant or the prosecutor. In this case they may tend to favor the defendant. There has been research that juries apply community standards to finding a defendant guilty or not guilty.

Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Jury Duty

Related Topics

Open Document