ipl-logo

The Jury System Is Not Fair Essay

795 Words4 Pages

“A Defense of the Jury System” by Thomas M. Ross told the story of a woman who was paid $2.7 million because she was careless enough to spill hot coffee on herself. There are many other cases like this that deal with irrational people trying to make quick money, which makes society wonder if the American Justice System is fair or not. Of course, for this reason and many others, the American Justice System is not fair.

One reason why the American Justice System is not fair is because of bias and racism within the system. According to “A Defense of the Jury System,” Juries are criticized for deciding cases based on prejudice and emotion rather than relying on the law. Allowing juries to know little about the law to make decisions regarding …show more content…

According to “A Defense of the Jury System”, “Also judges do not represent society, since most of them are still male, Caucasian, and from middle-class and well-to-do backgrounds. Many of them are different from many of the people that are arrested. In some cases, the jurors will vote against people different from them. Since most of them have white skin, they will probably convict blacks, African Americans, and Asians. “Women, minorities, and less wealthy people continue to be underrepresented in the court system. This shows that the big, strong, and wealthy white men are typically the ones that are not convicted. This shows racism, sexism, and just a hate for the poor. According to “How the Judicial System Works”, “Each state also has its own set of courts that can adapt to the needs of its people.” This could say that if the people want it, the state may provide it. This could lead to more drug-use, beating people, and so much more. If these things became legal without consequence, then the population would decrease and create more stress. This could create chaos and …show more content…

However, this is not typically the case. According to “Jury Duty”, “A grand jury is a panel of 16 to 23 people who determine whether there’s “probable cause” to charge someone with a crime. This is unfair because this many people are bound to have someone who has an unfair opinion. If too many people want to convict people just to convict them, then the innocents will be thrown in jail, while the people that actually commit the crime might walk free. According to “A Defense of the Jury System”, "The jury system is often attacked for delivering verdicts that sometimes seem irrational.” There are many cases that are criticized by civilians. There are cases that are judged only by a judge, not a jury. That means that one person could decide the difference between the innocent and the guilty. “Most jurors try to do a good job by being honest and fair. The key word here is most. There are also jurors that are racist or sexist and just want to convict someone. Another key word here is “try”. There are also many jurors who have their opinion swayed by the crowd and their emotions. They may feel sorrow for the person in the trial, and instead of convicting them for a crime they committed, they may declare them innocent and clear them of any

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
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
903 Words | 4 Pages

So, there is no such thing as a fair trial because juror members can go in favor of one side of the

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
823 Words | 4 Pages

For the same crimes, minorities are given harsher punishments, according to the literature (Feld, Singer, Skolnick, & Roberts, 2012). Cultural bias toward the LGBTQ community and the impoverished are two structural problems that must be addressed (The Balance, 2019). This bias may lead to erroneous accusations and convictions of otherwise innocent persons. American Jury System The jury system is an important part of the American criminal justice system because it guarantees defendants the opportunity to be tried by a group of their peers.

Read More
572 Words | 3 Pages

If it was selective to only a certain group of people or the same twelve Jurors all the time the ending vote for guilty or not guilty would most likely be similar because they would bond through the other cases that they have done together. Which, is unfair for the rest of America if all

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
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
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
2616 Words | 11 Pages

The jury system is unique for it being the only form of civic participation in delivering justice in criminal trials. The main idea behind still conducting jury trials in many countries is the public trust that a trial by jury is fairer than being tried by a judge and that juries produce better justice. Juries are ideally made up of community members of all different occupations, age, education level, gender, race, culture and sexuality. This can lead to a decision that encompasses the views and opinions of a broad range of society. Since there are twelve jurors, it becomes difficult to bribe them or corrupt them and is reflective of the shared decision rather than having a one judge make an individual decision which could be clouded by individual

Read More
992 Words | 4 Pages

Although jurors can be uneducated and unreasonable, people accused of a crime should face a trial by jury, for jurors are part of the common people of society and it ensures a verdict will not be based off an individual's beliefs. One reason that a person should face a trial by jury is that the jurors of the jury are part of the common people of society. Judges

Read More
585 Words | 3 Pages

There are .58% of criminal cases that get sent to trial by jury (Doc A). This evidence helps explain why jury trials should not still be an option because even though you might have a better chance with trial by jury but on a very small percentage of people actually are able to get tried by jury's. This pretty much means that you don't really have a trial by jury because of how many people won't get the chance for trial by

Read More
791 Words | 4 Pages

It does not matter if you are male or female, white or black, religious or not, everyone gets a chance to be a juror as long as one is a citizen of the country. Although it may seem that the views and opinions of a wide range of society can be included in the decision-making process is a good concept, however, there are consequences along with it, and that leads to the biggest flaw in the jury system - the lack of experience and knowledge in the court. It is difficult for ordinary citizens to understand a very subdivided focus of controversy in professional cases. Most jury members have limited opinions on the case due to the lack of acknowledging and understanding pieces of evidence. A jury may make its decision because one party's lawyer is more persuasive than the other rather than to make decisions based on the evidence presented, not to mention the whole purpose of the jury system is to decide if one side is innocent or guilty based on pure objective perspectives of bystanders.

Read More
1472 Words | 6 Pages

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).

Read More

More about The Jury System Is Not Fair Essay

Related Topics

Open Document