The Jury system is an important method used for many trials, however some debate that the system should be scrapped for criminal trials in NSW, in exchange for a judge only trail. Many argue this statement but from evidence that has been gathered, I am in support of this statement and argue with it, that the most accurate judgement is only declared by a trained legal professional like a judge or magistrate. There are many arguments, cases and legislations which provide an evident database of statements that may appeal to the use or misuse of the jury system. These documents and statements arise from many articles, legislations and cases including; R v Gittany case, the Jury Act 1977 and various media reports.
A jury is made up of 12-15 members of the community that are randomly selected to hear evidence presented in a court case, apply laws directed by the judge, and reach a verdict about whether or not the defendant is innocent or guilty.
The Jury system is trusted and reliable by many courts in NSW, which is why they have been continued. Having 12 other people be in a court room to assist the judge in making a decision improves the accuracy because a judge may get stuck and find it tough to come up with a final decision. Having a jury to assist you and give you an opinion is more reliable because it is not only one person, and undermines any one sided favor. The jury is more outspoken as they speak freely and are not represents of the law. Under the legislation it is a
In considering the effectiveness of the jury system, it is first necessary to understand the roles of juries. Primarily, a jury is a body of legally unqualified citizens who agree on a verdict based on evidence
One reason why jury trials shouldn’t be an option is because jurors are incompetent. The cartoon of Document E isn’t just humorous, it’s also pretty true. Jurors are forced
Every day people are convicted of crimes or arrested for other reasons. Once they are convicted they are summoned to court, this begins the jury process. Citizens are randomly chosen to serve on jury duty. The citizens on the jury will use the jury system to determine if the person being accused is guilty or innocent. Trials can become very long or they can be short it just depends on the topic and how long it takes to decide on what the consequences will be. The jury system is the main trial and the main decision of whether or not someone is right or wrong.
The American jury system is no longer reliable. Those on the American jury system usually base their decision on opinions rather than facts. Ordinary citizens do not have the a full understanding of the law. The majority of the jury is easily influenced like the image of the convicted can influence the juror. Jury duty is mandatory not a choice, it is a person's choice that is not their own.
Today we are here to speak upon todays Jury system and how it can be improved or should we have it removed. Well I'm here to tell you my side. I think jury duty at this point should be eliminated and done for because its has more convicted, its random people you can say with no experience on handling a situation like this with a “criminal” they don't know how to assess the situation at hand like if you were to go with the bench, and also some of the jurors don't even pay attention to the case they are there because they have to. In the jury system there has been more cases than in the bench for the year 2010.
Trial by jury can be traced back to the 12th Century and has been an integral part of the criminal justice system since Henry II favoured it over trial by ordeal (Davies, Croall and Tyrer 2010, p.311). Although they are used in both crown court trials and civil cases, the introduction of the Administration of Justice Act 1933 has reduced the use of juries in civil cases significantly (Joyce 2013, p.208). However, they are only used in about one third of cases in the Crown Court (Huxley-Binns and Martin, p.220). Since the 19th Century, the statutory provisions for jury service have been amended and revised considerably resulting in the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Throughout this essay I will be firstly discussing who is eligible to sit on a
The jury system has been used in the criminal trial since the Constitution stated “the trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury.”
Juries made up of everyday novices are the most relied upon people in the district and supreme courts when it comes to a criminal trial. Ultimately, 12 people will decide the fate of a defendant and either see them walk free or be incarcerated. What happens if they get it wrong? Although a wrongful convictions are unlikely in Australia they are usually down to police corruption, misreported evidence or a jury’s misinterpretation of the case. Untrained, average citizens are making massive decisions with barely any idea if they have followed the law or not. Personal feelings or experiences can affect the interpretation of the evidence. Also with a state like South Australia with smaller jury regions, the likely hood of know someone connected
In the 2013 case, R v Gittany, the accused, Simon Gittany, requested for a judge-only trial. This was due to the complexity of his murder case and the media coverage which Gittany believed would have influenced the jury’s perspectives and outcome. The complexities and intricacies of a trial that took barristers and solicitors years of expertise to understand and interpret cannot be expected to be completely understood from a group of twelve members from the public. This can be seen in a recent 2013 report from the Sydney Morning Herald, ‘Jurors Need More Direction’ where the NSW Law Reform Commission (LRC) found that the directions given to juries from judges ‘are not working, overly complex and need to be clearer’. However, their imperfections aren’t enough to have them off the trial process as juries allow the public to be involved in the judicial system. Public participation in the criminal trial process creates more confidence in the legal system. Juries are the most democratic aspect of the criminal trial process and are a crucial aspect in representing the interests and needs of the community.
Since the jury is a group of twelve people, it is safe to assume that they will come from different backgrounds, educational levels, religions, and ethnic groups. This does not mean that all diverse groups will be represented, but it is enough to offer diverse perspectives. This variety helps to eliminate any undue prejudice or bias that could be present in either a small group or single individual. Because these people have no association with anyone involved in the trial, they have no personal or financial reason to be biased. They will not be personally impacted by the outcome of the trials. This should result in an unbiased decision by the jury. A positive side effect of the jury system is that it affords the jurors a basic knowledge and education of the judicial system. Other than voting, it is the jury system that provides the most citizens an opportunity to be involved in government. Although we can learn about the judicial process in books, the experience of being a part of the system by participating on a jury is a more meaningful way of understanding the
“The Jury Selection Process” is a research paper that reviews the jury selection process in detail. First we will review the stages of the criminal trail and go in depth with the jury selection process. The paper will demonstrate why the jury selection process is necessary for the United States as well as its patrons. The paper will also provide a break down of advantages and disadvantages on the jury selection process. In addition to the information listed above, we will review some large profile court cases and its jury selection process. This will determine just how detailed and challenging the process can prove to
The responsibility of the jury in criminal and civil cases is to “determine questions of fact” and apply law as set out by the judge and then, with these facts and evidence, come up with a verdict.
A jury is a group of 12 people aged between 18 and 70 who have been randomly selected from the electoral roll. Juries are only used for indictable criminal offences, these cases are held in either the District or Supreme court.
With one of the aims that are of the symposium that is to demonstrate how the jury system and how it has managed to adapt and to survive in a range of a very different legal and the political environments. In the one respect, there is the survival of the jury in a country that has been long riddled with a political upheaval, violence, and the division that may have been viewed as a powerful symbol of a triumph of an institution that has endured throughout the years as a living testament to the adaptability of the common law tradition that is with the jury system that is often associated. Not only has the jury the survived the political troubles of the eighteenth and the nineteenth century in Ireland, but it has also survived the changes of
The Jury Selection Procedure in the English Legal System The theory behind modern day trial by jury can be traced back some