ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Trial By Jury

594 Words3 Pages

“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed…” This is the first right given to the accused as laid out by the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, a trial by jury. A right further protected by the Seventh Amendment and a right that has become increasingly controversial as American citizens and scholars have questioned its effectiveness and have offered what they believe to be better alternatives. Questions have also been asked as to whether the American people take this responsibility seriously as a 2007 National Center for State Courts survey showed that, on average, only 40% of citizens …show more content…

If an attorney finds a reason that he or she believes is reason enough to dismiss a juror then the judge may dismiss them for cause. However, the attorneys also have the ability of peremptory challenge which gives them the power of dismissing a juror without having to give a reason as to why (Sethi, Meera, DiLascio, and Tracey). The peremptory challenge is at the center of debate over juries and their efficiency today, as many people believe that it gives the attorneys the power of trying to craft a jury that will get them the best result, instead of a proper jury that they believe is most fit to oversee the case justly. This claim is disputed by some who point out that the jury has to be approved by both sides and the judge, meaning that if peremptory challenge was used then whoever replaced the previous possible juror’s place had been found suitable. This could in fact be evidence for the use of peremptory challenge as it showcases that it created a better jury that all parties agreed on (Whittaker, Anne, Newton, and

Show More
Related
704 Words | 3 Pages

A grand jury is composed of twelve people, to determine if there is enough evidence to send an accused individual to trial. Although they may not determine if the accused individual is guilty or not, they can issue a formal document saying there is enough evidence for the prosecutor to take the accused to trial also known as an indictment. According to, Texas Politics Today, “a grand jury may return indictments simply because the district attorney asks them to.” Which in the end is not fair, because the jury may believe that there is not enough sufficient evidence, but because they feel pressured they issue an indictment.

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
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
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
583 Words | 3 Pages

If people never had a right to trial by the jury, they could simply find people guilty of any accusation that are falsely claimed. Hence, through instituting the right to trial by the jury, the 7th amendment protects the citizens from this

Read More
1252 Words | 6 Pages

One of the most respected maxims in the American legal system is the presumption of innocence. This principle, embodied in the phrase "innocent until proven guilty," holds that anyone accused of a crime is considered innocent until the charges against them are proven. It places the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This fundamental notion is the foundation of the judicial system and is significantly associated with the concept of due process. Due process is essential for defendants' rights, but they are frequently ignored or unknown by the accused.

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
277 Words | 2 Pages

A grand jury is defined as “a panel of citizens that is convened by a court to decide whether it is appropriate for the government to indict (proceed with a prosecution against) someone suspected of a crime” (West's Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). Typically, a grand jury will review any evidences presented against an individual to decide whether or not to press charges. Within grand juries, there are typically sixteen to twenty-three members who will decide whether or not there is probable cause or enough evidence to issue an indictment. In order for an indictment to be issued, at least twelve members of the grand jury must vote in agreement for it (West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, 2008). Instead of a grand jury, investigations

Read More
696 Words | 3 Pages

According to a recent study, more than 80% of those charged with felonies are indigent. As a result, they are unable to hire an attorney and instead rely on representation by a public defender (Brunt). Therefore, it is implausible to spend the appropriate amount of time on a single case. Yet, the 6th amendment states, “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and

Read More
1566 Words | 7 Pages

The foundation of this part comprises of the standards: proceeding should be started just when there is sufficient confirmation; the choice to charge or not to charge is a prosecutions choice and not an adjudicative capacity of the court. 3.1. STAGES OF A CRIMINAL CASE BEFORE TRIAL On accepting data around a cognizable offense police register FIR and initiate examination. They gather confirmation, capture the denounced and create him before Judge and secure requests for police authority or legal remand.

Read More
2229 Words | 9 Pages

The Amendment states “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district ” (Bill of Rights). People acted upon their right to protest in Ferguson because they believed Micheal Brown did not receive justice for his murder. The Bill of Rights uses the word impartial to describe the jury of any court hearing. Impartial is defined as treating all rivals or disputants equally; fair and just: independent and impartial advice according to the New Oxford American Dictionary of 2010.

Read More
847 Words | 4 Pages

Trials shouldn’t be done in secret way from public eyes because how can you call that fair. Libertyfirstfl.org states that the 6th amendment has multiple clauses within it. Speedy Trial Clause, Public Trial Clause, Right to a Jury Trial Clause, Confrontation Clause, Arraignment Clause, Compulsory Process Clause, and Right to Counsel Clause. Right to jury is crucial to having a fair and just trial. It picks random citizens to sit in a trial, they don’t choose people that might know the defendant.

Read More
1030 Words | 5 Pages

The Constitution states “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” ( US Constitution) As you can see, the Bill of Rights 6th Amendment allows the accused to understand the charges against them: the accused is told what he/ she is being accused of, who is accusing them, and is allowed to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. Moreover, it allows for the movement of rightful convictions.

Read More
832 Words | 4 Pages

INTRODUCTION It is the most common perception of people to prosecute and punish those who commit war crimes or atrocities against humanity, nonetheless they should be given a fair trial. A fair trial, free from judicial bias and political pressures is a legal right. The fairness is not only the prerogative of the victims but also the accused for it is an important component of the mandate to the International Court of Justice. To interpret fairness one requires a more holistic concept not just limiting to judicial proceeding but one that effectively helps parties realise their rights under the Rome Statute.

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 Pros And Cons Of Trial By Jury

Related Topics

Open Document