More handpicked essays just for you.
Effectiveness of trial by jury
Effectiveness of a jury system in a criminal trial
What is the history of jury system in brief
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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
By fair Jury, the trial must take place in the county the crime took place. The accused have to know what they 're being charged with, why they 're in jail, who said they did it, and ask them questions. Put cues can force anyone to come to their trial and the cutest also has the right to a lawyer and if they can 't afford one they will
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.
Over the years, a plethora of court cases have caused Americans to wonder: is our jury system indeed as wondrous as it is conceived to be? To explain, the jury system is the concept of giving the defendant in a trial the option of either having a bench trial, one where a judge alone reaches a verdict, or a trial by jury, one where a group of twelve ordinary citizens is chosen to reach a verdict on the case. One may wonder why a dozen everyday denizens are being endowed with the absolute power over a possibly life or death decision in the life of a neighbor that is unknown to them, but the framers of the United States Constitution believed that this was the most democratic option in making sure that justice is properly served. Explaining further,
Under the Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to impartial jury. The jury will consider the evidence against the defendant and decide whether to find him or her guilty of the crime. Twelve jurors must agree in order to find a defendant guilty or not guilty. If the jury fails to reach a unanimous verdict and finds itself at a standstill, the judge may declare a mistrial.
The fifth amendment declares everyone is entitled to a fair trial and cannot be put on trial for the same crime twice. The sixth amendment states that everyone is entitled to a fair and speedy trial. The seventh amendment discloses the right for everyone to have a jury trial. The eighth amendment prohibits excessive bail, and cruel, unusual, or torturous punishments for crimes. The ninth amendment are the enumerated rights.
Is the American Jury System still a Good Idea? In the American Judicial System today, there is a choice between trial by jury or bench trial. Trial by jury is used today by selecting jurors from pools of people who are eligible, adult American citizens. Trial by jury is often controversial because of how the jurors are not professionals whereas in a bench trial, a judge is highly educated in law (Doc B).
In the United States Constitution, the Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments from the U.S. Bill of Rights, deal specifically with the rights of criminal defendants. The Fourth Amendment provided the criminal suspects protection from police officers and prosecutors for unreasonable searches and seizures. The Fifth Amendment guarantees a trial by jury, due process of law, and guards against double jeopardy and self-incrimination. The Sixth Amendment provided rights to accused persons and right to a speedy and public trial. The Eighth Amendment protects criminals from punishments.
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.
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.
Regardless of what is fair and what is not, the defendant has rights during trial. One of those rights under the 5th Amendment is the right against self incrimination and according to Winegar, the 6th Amendment provides a defendant the ability to testify on one’s behalf (2013). However, lack of testimony from a defendant can cause an interference with the jury or cloud their judgement because they were not previewed to what the defendant has to say. According to Hall, the jury is instructed not to guess or assume guilt because the defendant does not put on a defense.
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.
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.
The Sixth Amendment right states that a Criminal Defendant, Miranda, has the right to a public trial with unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury,
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,
