Exploring the Function of the Jury
The jury has to weigh up the evidence and decide what are the true facts of the case, i.e. what actually happened. The judge directs them as to what is the relevant law, and the jury then have to apply the law to the facts that they have found and thereby reach a verdict.
Jury service is compulsory.
QUALIFICATION FOR JURY SERVICE: -
Home Office research in 1999 found that only 1 of 3 people summoned for jury service actually turned up to do it. Forty percent (40%) were excused for personal reasons - work, holidays, exams, medical etc. Many believe that potential jurors easily escape their duty for no valid reason, as the courts do not have the
…show more content…
deafness, language problems, the judge can discharge the person under Section 41 Criminal Justice & Public Order Act 1994.
Media attention was drawn to this issue in 1999 when a deaf person, Mr. McWhinney was discharged. Mr. McWhinney wished to fulfill his role as a citizen by sitting on the jury with the help of a signer - but his appeal was not allowed, as the addition of the signer would make the jury 13 rather than 12 in number.
DISQUALIFIED ------------
Finally, no one with a serious criminal record is supposed to sit on a jury. Anyone who has had imposed on him a sentence of imprisonment, or youth custody or community or suspended sentence service within the previous 10 years is disqualified, as is anyone who has received a sentence of imprisonment or youth custody for 5 years or more. Also, anyone placed on probation within the previous 5 years is also disqualified.
A typical jury today is likely to be much younger, have a closer ratio of men to women and have more working-class members than one 10 years ago. Some lawyers take the view that the lower age limit should be 25 years.
INTELLIGENCE
Juries are also criticized on the basis that their level of comprehension of cases, and perhaps their level of intelligence, are too low. The Frauds Trial Committee, chaired by Lord Roskill,
Serving on a jury is a civic duty and an American tradition. However, some people view jury duty as a chore or as an event that negatively interrupts their lives. Some independent studies have shown that even jury duty has a devastating effect on married life. Due to this and other extraneous situations, there are only a few people who actually want to serve on a jury. This may lead to efforts by potential jurors to, in some way get out of their duty in a jury. What we know of as the current jury duty system should be changed so citizens are not forced to serve in this capacity and can still be regarded as a responsible civilian. As per the status quo, a trial jury is a constitutional right, a jury of ones peers or equals. However,
In a world where showing a bit too much shoulder was forbidden, came Susan Glaspell. Glaspell was an American playwright, born in the cruel times of oppression. This influenced women’s opinions on certain subjects which caused them to be silenced by fear of rejection from society. “A Jury of Her Peers” was based on an era where women felt as though it was unreasonable to speak up if they felt it was not absolutely dire. Harboring these pent up feelings could cause a person to act antagonistic. Minnie Wright was an example of this. She killed her husband and was subjected to the judgement of her peers. As the group investigated Mr. Wright’s death, there were two stories unraveling. The in depth explanation that the women figured out and the simplistic version the men had seemed to pick up (Glaspell). People would benefit from reading this story to begin to understand the struggle of what this and other women had gone through. Penn Manor American Literature students would benefit from having Susan Glaspell’s story “A Jury of Her Peers” in their curriculum because of how she expressed feminism through her writing at a time when it was new and discouraged; her ability to emphasize the themes with her settings and characters; and her literature that follows a protagonist that navigates through a sexist world.
Inside a room where life or death decisions are made, twelve men sit with wandering thoughts. The made up minds of some jurors are to send a boy to his death without a second thought, but one other juror may change that. Inside of the play Twelve Angry Men written by Reginald Rose, Juror 8 has the persuasive evidence to change the minds of his fellow Jurors and save a boy from his execution. The other Juror’s seem like they won’t budge with their mind set on the decision of guilty, but after Juror 8 proves his thoughts on the decision of innocent, he may just be able to save a young life.
For this essay I asked my Grandma Diane questions about jury duty. She has never served on a jury but she has been summonsed to questioning to possibly be on one. When she got the summons letter she wasn’t excited, “ I didn’t want to do it, because I didn’t feel that I [had] the right to judge anyone else,” and didn’t really want to go. She got asked questions like, “Could you be impartial? Could you be fair? If “this” happened would you say that the person is guilty? Are you related to the person/persons involved? Have you heard anything about the case?,” the attorneys asked these questions because they wanted to make sure they had a jury that would make an unbiased decision in the court case. My grandma said that, “It made [her] respect what
Juries in NSW The jury system plays a very important part in the running of the courts. The jury system is needed in both criminal and civil cases. There are advantages of the jury system as well as disadvantages.
In Susan Glaspell’s, “A Jury of her Peers”, it is the women who take center stage and captivate the reader’s emotions. Throughout the feministic short story, which was written in 1917, several repeating patterns and symbols help the audience to gain a deeper understanding of the difficulty of prairie life for women and of the bond that women share. The incredible cunning the women in the story demonstrate provides insight into the innate independence that women had even during days of deep sexual discrimination. In “A Jury of her Peers”, the hardships women of the early twentieth century must endure and the sisterhood that they can still manage to maintain are manifested as a mysterious, small-town murder unfolds.
Jury nullification is when a jury acquits a defendant who it believes is guilty of the crime he is charged (Hickey, 2010. p. 370). This is because the jury chose to ignore the facts of the case and the judge instructions, and based his or her decision on personal opinion. If we are going to allow jury nullification we may as well not take up the tax-payer’s money to even take it to trial. Nullification – The act of making a law null and void (nullifying). For example, during prohibition, many juries found defendants innocent, even when the state had proven its case, because they did not think the law should exist. State legislatures also have nullified federal laws within their borders, creating a nullification crisis for the federal
In “A Jury of Her Peers” by Susan Glaspell, Minnie Foster Wright is the main character, even though the reader never sees Mrs. Wright. The story begins as Mrs. Hale joins the county attorney, Mr. Henderson; the sheriff, Mr. Peters; Mrs. Peters; and her husband in a “big two-seated buggy” (188). The team men are headed the Wright house to investigate Mr. Wright’s murder. Mrs. Peters is going along to gather some belongings for Mrs. Wright, who is currently being held in jail, and Mrs. Hale has been asked to accompany Mrs. Peters. As the investigation is conducted throughout the story, the reader is given a sense of how women were treated during this time and insight into why the women ultimately keep evidence from the men.
Juries exists in the criminal trial to listen to the case presented to them and, as a third, non-bias party, decide beyond reasonable doubt if the accused is guilty. For the use of a trial by juror to be effective, no bias should exists in the jurors judgments, the jurors should understand clearly their role and key legal terms, and the jury system should represent the communities standards and views whilst upholding the rights of the accused and society and remain cost and time effective.
For this criteria I will be producing a written evaluation of the effectiveness of magistrates and juries in the administration of justice in the English legal system.
At first, I was certain that it was not justice served in the case, but I had to attend for more information as in the article wasn’t all the details around this compelling case, and my opinion changed completely. I found the whole history in the New York Magazines. In this article, is seen the defendant guilty because he lied in their testimonies more than once, and when someone lies to us, we believe that he might do something wrong instead of that he might be nervous or afraid that everyone thinks something that it wasn’t true. Nevertheless, it was not enough evidence and non-witnesses that collaborate their history, and the jury was overwhelmed because the state took their freedom for four days, they only want to get home. On the other
Any jury trial is bound to have some sort of conflict involved when coming to a verdict. The portrayal of a murder case in the movie, 12 Angry Men, involves many different examples of conflict, as well as the approaches to conflict used by different characters. Almost every conversation in the film involves conflict, since the characters are all debating whether or not the boy being tried for murder is guilty or not, but there are a few scenes in which different types of conflict and different approaches to conflict seem to stand out.
Women’s rights were a significant issue in the nineteenth century, and in “A Jury of Her Peers.” The men overlooked the rights and problems that the women in “A Jury of Her Peers” were enduring. Women, however, through these issues, have been able to come together. In “A Jury of Her Peers,” the journey of women’s rights portrays women’s unity.
Reginald Rose’s ’12 Angry Men’ brings 12 jurors together in a room to decide whether a young foreign boy is guilty of killing his father. The play is interwoven with dynamic characterisation, striking symbolism and intense moments of drama. Although Rose positions Juror 8 as the hero, the strongest character is in fact Juror 4, who is an independent thinker, rational and calm even as tension begins to build. Although Juror 4 initially votes guilty, he is able to admit his fault and change his vote.
As in the case of most, if not all, good allegorical stories, the primary impact of the tale is strongly influenced by the author’s detailed characterization of the setting, as well as the characters’ feelings and passions. Certainly such is the case in Susan Glaspell’s story “A Jury of Her Peers”. Here the reader sees a richness of characterization and setting that is elusive at first reading, but becomes clearer as the story evolves. In the final analysis, it becomes clear just who the jury is and the outcome of their collective verdict. It is by the use of allegorical and metaphorical rhetoric that the tension of the story is maintained so very well.