ipl-logo

What I Learned Serving On Grand Jury Duty

992 Words4 Pages

Is the trial by jury the best system for those accused of a crime? A jury is a group of normal citizens of the United States asked to serve as a juror for several weeks. Most crimes committed around the world are faced with a trial by jury, to decide the faults and innocence of a crime. Both text 2- "A Defense of the Jury System" by Thomas M. Ross and Text 3- "What I learned serving on Grand Jury Duty" by Barbara Wagner relate to the topic of a trial by jury. 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 …show more content…

However, a judge is only one person that majored in criminal cases and crimes. Since judges are not representative of society as a whole, "...the experiences and perspectives of women, minorities and poor and working-class people would be underrepresented in a system in which all cases were decided by judges" (Text 2, Line 34-36). This highlights the importance of the jury system in contrast to a judge for a jury has members who are experienced in society, since they are part of the common people. Also, it clarifies the lower classmen and their experiences, as opposed to a judges upper class experience in society. Moreover, all ideas and views of society are demonstrated in a jury system. A jury system includes a variety of perspectives in society,

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
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
767 Words | 4 Pages

It is important to make sure a trial remains fair. Lay people may struggle to do this due to lack of training. A downside to using legal personnel is that they can forget about public perspectives and values. This could lead to a decision that doesn't reflect social norms, which can knock the public's confidence in the legal system.

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
1216 Words | 5 Pages

Juror are randomly chosen citizens brought in to watch and interpret the case, and break it down and decide whether the defendant is guilty or not. Reginald Rose´s 12 Angry Men was written after while watching real murder trial it inspired him to reveal the positives and negatives of Jury deliberations. While bench trial have strong merits, trial by Jury is more effective for many reasons including,the diversity and variety of backgrounds the jurors bring, the increase chance of discovering the truth, as well as, the fact that Jurors are usually more caring then a Judge who may be calloused from previous experiences is why trial by Jury is the fairest way to decide a criminal case. A significant advantage trial by jury offer is the diversity and variety in backgrounds the Jurors. While the Jurors were discussing the stab wound Juror Five presents the relevant the point with his jurors saying, ¨ You don 't hold this of knife that way.

Read More
271 Words | 2 Pages

One reason why we shouldn’t have a jury trial is because most people that are in the jury aren’t even professionals. They choose 12 random adult citizens from the community to be in the jury, so how would they know if they are professionals or not. Professionals know what their doing,

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
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
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
2054 Words | 9 Pages

Under the 6th amendment, Americans have the right to an “impartial jury”. The purpose of a jury is to provide an unbiased, outside approach to a case. A juror’s role is to listen to both sides of the debate, evaluate all the evidence presented, and make a decision. The United States is known for implementing checks and balances into our government system.

Read More
635 Words | 3 Pages

The legal system in Canada is recognized as a neutral, predictable and impartial system in maintaining social order. Each citizen is guaranteed a fair and equal treatment from the legal system. The law thereby acts like an equal, predictable and calculable system. However, the jury system has questionable actions, unclear purpose and undermines the entire legal system of equality. This paper will demonstrate how the jury system fails and lacks the capacity to judge and indict the accused because of the jurors’ bias and flaws in problem solving.

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
396 Words | 2 Pages

Those who argue for judge only trials must accept that judges make mistakes and they are not infallible. There is no remedy if the judge does in fact make a mistake. Another positive of trial by Jury is that it helps the criminal justice system reflect the values and standards of the public. On the other

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
1594 Words | 7 Pages

Jury systems exist all around the world. Many have a long history, while others are just emerging. Juries of different countries examine trials and decide on many factors in a court case. They play a vital role in court and are the deciding factor about whether a victim is guilty or not. The role of a jury may be different depending on the country.

Read More

More about What I Learned Serving On Grand Jury Duty

Related Topics

Open Document