Trial By Jury Essay

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,

The jury system of a trial is an essential element of the democratic process. It attempts to secure fairness in the justice system. Traditionally, the jury system has been viewed as a cornerstone of common law procedure. However, the use of the system of trial by jury is on the decline. Today, its use differs, depending on whether (a) it is a civil or criminal matter, and (b) in criminal matters, whether it is a summary or an indictable offence.

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.

The current jury system is based on an almost millennium-old principle found in the Magna Carta (1215). As a result of changes in society since, the system must be seen as potentially outdated. In other words, it may not satisfy the needs of modern society, judged by what the major stakeholders of the criminal justice system expect. Indeed, there are substantial flaws in current jury systems in terms of effectiveness. The two major concerns with jury systems are their representativeness and their levels of competence. The representativeness of juries is essential as their reason for existing is to represent the views of society. Having twelve jurors could be understood to ensure representativeness and eliminate room for bias. However, this does not remove the possibility of juries being biased towards parties. Even if the potential jurors contacted are representative in terms of gender, ethnicity, age and socioeconomic status and though jury duty is a compulsory engagement, 90% of Queenslanders opt out of it. This makes it very likely that juries will not be representative. One example is ethnic diversity. There is likely to be less ethnic diversity in courts because ethnic minorities might not have sufficient language ability or access to interpreters to be jurors. Another example is age. It is likely that retired people

Alfred Hitchcock uses dramatic and verbal irony to explain women’s powerful intuition compared to men’s analytical skills. Gender differences are presented in a dramatic manner. Further, the short film explains the differences in gender character’s present in the society (Leitch, 18). For instance, men appear to have an arrogant feeling of superiority against women. This is highly evident in the society we live in because there are high levels of gender inequality. Moreover, women in the story act in solidarity-resisting men’s act of superiority. This brings the theme of feminism creatively in the film.

Capital Punishment is an issue that has been argued over from the dinner table in

The role of the jury in criminal

Conflict between the US and Mexico began with Mexico's and Texas’s differences caused them to clash leaving to Texans’ war for independence from Mexico, which they gained in 1836. Texas then asked the US for annexation, which the US refuse the first two times, but them in 1845 the US annexed Texas. After the annexation of Texas Mexico and the United States had different perspectives, leading to the border dispute where US-Mexican troops fought, and hence that came to the US-Mexican war in 1845. This trial is meant to decide if America’s actions were honorable and justified, or if the United States used its power to manipulate Mexico. Based on all the evidence presented, the jury declared the US to be guilty on the charge of wrongfully provoking a war with Mexico.

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

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.”

Justice Evatt delivered a paper to the Australian Legal Convention which entitled “The Jury System in Australia” in 1936 . Justice Evatt’s thesis of Jury trials was that “in modern day society the jury system is regarded as an essential feature of real democracy”. Jury trials in the nineteenth century were found way before in four colonies Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia . When Trial by Judge alone was first introduced in South Australian thirty eight were held in the Supreme Court between 1989 and 1993, meaning all annual percentage of all criminal trials in the court ranged between 3.9% and 8.9% . The Juries Act SA 1927 was amended many times making some major changes. In 1966, women were introduced in the South Australian Jury system as only men were capable of serving on Juries. An increase to the number of jurors available to contribute in a criminal trial was amended in 2004 . It now states in the Juries Act 1927 under section 6A that if court agrees there are good reasons to add additional jurors of 2 or 3 it can be empanelled for a criminal trial .

This essay will discuss the role of the magistrate and jury in the English and Welsh legal decision-making process. It will assess both the advantages and disadvantages of both mechanisms and give an opinion on the contribution they make in the process.

The Selection and Role of a Jury in a Criminal Trial This assignment focuses on how a jury is selected and its role in a

The major participants in a criminal trail include the judge, prosecuting attorney, defense counsel, clerks of the courts, bailiff, and the court reporter. At trail, whether if the charge is a felony or misdemeanor or even if the trail is a court trial or jury trail, the defendant is entitled to a fair trial before an impartial judge and a honest jury in an atmosphere of judicial claim.

The next day, before lunch, we were called for an assembly in the gym, just as Principal Celestia promised. I couldn't help but smirk as the students whispered about what it was for. After we all sat down, Principal Celestia stepped onto the stage. She cleared her throat, “I'm sure you're all aware of the Anon-a-miss situation.” Celestia had to pause as the gym blew up in cheers.