Essay On Jury Tampering

Essay On Jury Tampering
Jury tampering is when there is attempted influence on the decisions of a jury during the course of a
trial; this is a crime. It could be when jurors are intimidated or bribed into performing in a certain
manner while on duty. In the United Kingdom, non–jury trials are allowed under the Criminal
Justice Act 2003 when there is risk of jury tampering.
Reform of The Jury
Despite its historical role in the English Legal System and the almost sacred place it occupies in the
public imagination, the jury has come under increasing attack in recent years. Reforms could
generally mean Acts of Parliament. A broad range of proposals have been suggested for the reform
of the jury system.
The 1999 Jury Proposals
The government declared its intentions to introduce legislation to control the right to jury trial.
Principally, in either way cases, it wished to disallow a defendant from insisting upon trial by jury
where magistrates believed that they were well suited to hear the case. The Bar, civil rights groups
and other lawyers condemned the proposed reform. The government then issued the Auld Report, in
order to review the whole criminal justice system. Its main recommendations on the jury system
were;
a) ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Apart from for those with criminal convictions or mental disorders, no one in future should be
ineligible or excusable as a right from jury service. These proposals are now contained in the
Criminal Justice Act 2003.
b) The Ministry of Justice commissioned a report in 2007 on diversity and fairness.
c) The defendants should no longer have an elective right to trial by jury in either way cases. Under
the Criminal Justice Act 2003, defendants have retained this right but there are provisions for judge
only
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

Importance Of The Jury System
The American jury system is used most commonly in court, but many question if the jury system
should still be included in trials. The jury system should be kept in court trials because it will ensure
justice is properly made, allow citizens to be involved in the court system, allow citizens to be heard
by the government, and it reviews forgotten evidence shown in court. Some American citizens are
beginning to doubt the "trial by jury" aspect of court systems, but the majority still supports this
system. A jury is a group of people who decide the fate of the defendant. Juries play a large role in
court systems and help decide the punishment of the accused. Justice is something every human
wants made for someone when being accused of a crime. Having a jury will let unbiased citizens
review the facts and speculations discussed during a case and come to a decision. The use of
different views from multiple people helps look at evidence different ways and see hidden
information. Joe Adamson states, "I think it is really great that we have science, but we also have
common sense. These jurors didn't buy into science fiction (Doc D)." This statement represents that
justice was made in regards of the accused. The jurors studied the evidence and came to a decision
using the facts and also hidden or forgotten aspects of the case. A jury system allows citizens to be
involved in the government by participating in a trial by jury. Allowing citizens to be involved in a
jury system shows

Jury Nullification And The Jury
JURY NULLIFICATION
[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]
JURY NULLIFICATION
Definition
Jury invalidation is the thing that happens when a jury returns a decision of "Not Guilty" in spite of
its conviction that the respondent is liable for the infringement charged. The jury invalidates a law
that it accepts is either indecent or wrongly connected to the respondent whose destiny they are
accused of choosing.
Introduction
Jury nullification has since quite a while ago entranced courts, scholastics, and society when all is
said in done. The force, or possibly right, of a jury to either convict or absolve a criminal litigant, in
spite of the jury 's conviction that the law and proof request an opposite result, has mixed debate
since its beginning, and keeps on polarizing. As it as of now stands, nullification possesses a
position in the sundown, authoritatively denounced by the United States Supreme Court, yet
permitted even urged to get by different, enduring assurances of choice jury making. Resounding
the conclusions of courts around the nation, juries without a doubt have no privilege to invalidate,
however, they likewise most likely have the ability to do as such, as nobody, not even the judge, is
permitted to do much to control a rebel jury in a criminal trial. What 's more, finds, that while in
many occasions nullification is

Essay On Juries
In today's society a defendant is innocent till proven guilty in the court of law. In every jury trial, the
lawyers always begin a cases with the process of selecting the jurors. Juries is define as a group of
people who are members of the community and are chose to give a verdict in a legal case. Jury duty
is mandatory for all United States citizens (White, Black, Male or Female). To fully understand how
important the jury selection is for the criminal justice system, we need to first understand the
process of jury selection.
Jury members have an important role; which is to determine whether an accused person is guilty or
not of the crime he or she committed. Juries must carefully examine evidence and witnesses
presented at trial. For this reason the process of selecting juries is very important because it "ensure
the impartiality of jury being impaneled" (Schmalleger, 2011; P. 353).Every citizen in the United
State have the right to "fair trial" by jury in criminal cases and the Sixth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution guarantees this. Names on the jury list are usually selected from ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Challenges of cause is when judges dismiss jury/juror who are bias or can't put their personal
feelings aside. For example, a woman who was in an abusive relationship and was able to escape
can not server in a jury because she is obsvsily expected to have a bias against a defendant being
trial for a domestic violnence. Another circumstances where a lawyer may want to make a challenge
for cause is for example, a black jury whose son got shot by a white cop can not be server in a jury
cases where a defendant is a white cop and he is being trial for shooting a young black man.
However, lawyers can not dismiss an individual due to his/her enthnicity, race, or religion. A
challenge for cause can only be made base on the juror's experiences or beliefs. Another options
avalible to lawyers is peremptory

Jury Nullification
Ethnicity and the Courts
Tina Martin–Fleming
CJA/344
August 28, 2014
Thomas Bullock
Jury Nullification is the process that allows members of the juror to acquit a defendant for crimes
they do not feel is grounds for punishment. Although, many jurors may not know this is an option to
many cases, it is still an option. If citizens use this option in many of the courtroom proceedings,
there will be fewer people who are serving time in prison. On the other hand, this does interfere with
the decision– making process. This paper will explain whether ethnicity influences courtroom
proceedings and judicial practices. It will summarize the arguments for and against ethnicity–based
jury nullification. Including contemporary examples of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
They would determine guilt or innocence based on the details. A person of the same racial profile
may be subject to feelings the feelings of sorry for the person based on their lifestyle or childhood
issues that they may feel has a bearing on their criminal behavior. Jury nullification is the process
that allows individuals to be acquitted based on evidence, guilt or innocence not for feelings, but if a
crime exists does it deserves punishment.
Include Contemporary Examples of ethnicity–based jury nullification
According to "The O.J. Simpson Trial: The Jury" One example of ethnicity–based jury nullification
was O.J. Simpson. This case was a very high profile case of racial disparity. Because of this it made
the prosecutor and the defense attorney very difficult to find suitable jurors to hear this case. O.J
Simpson was a black man accused of killing his wife who was white. Not only did it cause major
issues about racial disparities, but the chances of obtaining a conviction for which he was could
prove impossible.
Many of the jurors

Jury And Jury Similarities
Juries have been utilized in the system of law and order for more than 1000 years. Their original
purpose was to provide local insight and information that acted more as a witness rather than final
decisions. By the late 15th Century, the jury system had been recognized as an important faction in
the legal system and had become independent as it matured from simple witness to decider of fact.
Consequently, the jury system became undeniably important following the Revolutionary War. The
right to trial by jury was symbolic in the sense that it represented the overthrown power of the king.
From its early stages to this, the system of trial by jury has become the central tenet of our belief in
a justice centered law. Our ideal of equal justice for all most likely could not have evolved without
the strong belief in the wisdom of the jury.
Although trial by jury was ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Grand jury and trial jury share similarities as well as differences. Consistently, a grand jury helps the
prosecution decide whether criminal charges should be placed against a suspect in a crime.
Ultimately a grand jury consists of 23 selected people, and they may have duty for months at a time.
However, the jurors will only be working for only a few days out of the duration. However, Trial
juries will decide the facts of a case and usually consist of 6–12 people. When a juror is selected for
trial jury, they can expect to work every day of the trial, which can amount to weeks and even
months in extreme cases. Also, Grand jury's decision will not be the final step in the case.
Prosecution may use the Grand Jury's findings as a test–run for trials. However, despite their
decision not being the decision factor in a case, a grand jury's decision is taken seriously and is by
no means disregarded. In contrast, though, A trial jury's verdict is final. Although an appeal can be
made, a trial jury's decision on facts will hold firm throughout the appeal process

Dbq Jury System
There are certain aspects of the United States' government that seem to be at the core of ensuring
democracy for all citizens. These ideas include representative leaders like the President, or the
bicameral legislature. Similarly, the jury system is another structure of the government that many
people hold close to their hearts. Although it seems like the ultimate way that the citizens can self–
govern, is the jury system really the best way to reach a verdict in civil and/or criminal cases? The
bottom line is that the jury system is an outdated structure. Specifically, bench trials, or trials
decided only by a judge, are much more effective than jury trials because judges are more educated,
less susceptible to popular influence, and are not ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In trials like that of Casey Anthony, the mother arrested and charged with killing her two–year–old
daughter Caylee, the popularity and widespread coverage of the case definitely influenced how
citizens across the country believed Anthony should be sentenced (Document D). Anyone who saw
one news story on the case that was then called to the jury probably already had formed their
opinion on the status of Anthony's innocence, without reviewing any court evidence. Consequently,
their predisposed opinion, similar to the cats' on the jury in Cartoon 3 of Document E, could have
resulted in a weighted outcome. Also, the fear of a "wrong decision" made by the jury could have
motivated a juror to vote solely for the outcome most popularly desirable. For example, Document
D quotes Janine Gonzalez, a nearby member of Anthony's community, as saying "She (Casey
Anthony) better move and move to a faraway place." Even though, in the end, Anthony was
declared innocent, the fear of her life as well as the possible violence that could occur after the
verdict could have been enough to sway a juror to convict her just to satisfy a popular

Effectiveness of a Jury Essay
Evaluate the effectiveness of the jury system in the criminal trial
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.
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." ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
This amendment was introduced after the Bruce Burrell case (2005) where, after two weeks of
deliberations, all jurors were firmly in favor of one verdict except for one who was firmly against
the majority verdict. The case illustrated the vulnerabilities of the previous jury system in creating a
time and cost ineffective measure of trialing defendants where justice was not necessarily achieved.
Another recent reform is the passing of legislation in 2006 which provided three additional 'spare'
jurors to be empanelled on lengthy criminal trials for example in the case R v. Wood. These recent
reforms in legislation have led to the jury system being more cost and time effective in the criminal
trial. Allowing a majority vote instead of strict unanimous verdict reduces the risk of a hung jury
and hence prevents jury bribing and jury disagreements. By avoiding a retrial, the criminal trial
process saves huge amounts of time and money for all individuals involved and hence maintains the
integrity of the jury system. Equally, allowing spare jurors in lengthy trials is hugely cost and time
effective as retrials are often avoided in the case where there is misconduct amongst the jurors.
Although the jury system can be argued to be an

Jury System
The Jury System
CLU 3M1
By: Khalil Meghji
The jury system has been used for thousands of years to fairly determine innocence or guilt in a
trial. Although not utilized as much as in the past it is still used for most criminal and some civil
cases. This leads to an unjust legal system full of bias. The jury system was first seen in use by the
ancient Greeks thousands of years ago[1]. Though the system was the fairest way to produce a
verdict, it cannot apply today because society has endured a change which taints the foundation of a
fair trial by jury. Juries are much more open to tampering by interested parties through which can be
undetected by the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This can alter the impact of evidence or testimony and the juror cannot make an informed decision.
The jury is not familiar with the law which can lead to confusion about different legal terms, what
evidence is considered circumstantial and how to exclude that from their decision after seeing it in
court. A jury comprised of the general public are also much more open to being influenced by how a
lawyer presents their case and not by evidence. Since the jury does not have any knowledge of
forensics they can be influenced by expert witnesses put on the stand by both the defense and the
prosecution which are completely contradictory.
The jury system has been used for thousands of years however, there are more logical and
economical methods to judge innocence or guilt fairly. While the jury system is not only taxing on
the government's resources it is also very difficult for the juror's. A juror in Canada is not
compensated for trials under 10 days, if a trial runs from 11–49 days they get forty dollars a day,
after 49 days the juror's receive one–hundred dollars per day[6]. To put a working citizen in the
position of losing up to ten days pay to serve in jury duty is very difficult. Being put into jury duty
potentially carries other costs such as childcare and transportation which is not covered by the
government.
The jury system has been in use for thousands of years and has produced many fair verdicts. This
system in

The Value of a Jury System
The Value of a Jury System
The Founders of our nation understood that no idea was more central to our Bill of Rights ––
indeed, to government of the people, by the people, and for the people –– than the citizen jury. It
was cherished not only as a bulwark against tyranny but also as an essential means of educating
Americans in the habits and duties of citizenship. By enacting the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh
Amendments to the Constitution, the Framers sought to install the right to trial by jury as a
cornerstone of a free society.
The Framers of the Constitution felt that juries –– because they were composed of ordinary citizens
and because they owed no financial allegiance to the government –– were indispensable to
thwarting the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Tocqueville keenly understood these linkages: "The jury system as understood in America seems to
me to be as direct and extreme a consequence of the . . . sovereignty of the people as universal
suffrage. They are both equally powerful means of making the majority prevail. The jury is above
all a political institution [and] should be made to harmonize with the other laws establishing the
sovereignty . For society to be governed in a settled and uniform manner, it is essential that the jury
lists should expand or shrink with the lists of voters .
"[In general] in America all citizens who are electors have the right to be jurors."
We have come to think of voting as the quintessential act of democratic participation. Historically,
the role of the people in serving on juries was often likened to the role of voters selecting legislative
bodies, and even to the role of legislators themselves. Indeed, the jury 's place in the judicial
framework was closely related to the idea of bicameralism: Just as the legislature comprised two
equal branches, an upper and a lower, juries and judges constituted the lower and upper branches,
respectively, of the judicial department.
The Supreme Court has reinforced the linkage of jury service and voting as part of a "package" of
political rights. For example, in a 1991 case challenging race–based exclusions in jury selection,
Justice Anthony Kennedy observed in his majority opinion that "with the

Jury Dilemmas
Why aren't jurors, the people who can potentially decide whether a person lives or dies, properly
trained in the field of law? Despite the conviction that the United States judicial system is impartial
and unblemished, juries thwart this assumption from becoming an actuality, thus making courts
inadequate to generate a proper verdict. A fair trial entails unbiased and erudite jurors that establish
an adjudication based solely on evidence, yet run of the mill citizens can have predisposed
prejudices forged upon the grounds of race. Moreover, with the germination of many technological
advancements, biases are conceived from illicit research conducted by jurors in the deliberation
room, which perpetuates the notion that trials are becoming ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Pope Innocent III " forbade priestly involvement in ordeals–thus taking away their holy sanction
[and] in 1215, a jury system was loosely in place in Norman England. In this system, the king's
court chose twelve persons to testify as to what they knew about the facts of a case or the character
of the parties involved" (The American Trial Jury). Since its establishment in 1215, problems have
arisen regarding the jury system across the world. Foremost, the rise of technology engendered
unjust trials and biased jurors in the 1950s, during the Sam Sheppard case. The news media released
the names and telephone numbers of the jurors involved in the case and they encouraged local
citizens to call the, to voice their opinions during a trial, and therefore the jury was not isolated from
media outlets (The American Trial Jury). Race also generates dilemmas with the jury system, like in
the case of Keith Tharpe. Woefully, he was on trial for murder and convicted solely because of a
racist juror who referred to him as a derogatory name for blacks (A Black Man Convicted By a
Racist Juror is About To Be Executed). Likewise, the jury system is flawed due to a rise in juror
misconduct. In the year 2009, during the court case United States v. Bristol–Martir, a juror
conducted illicit research on the case and was subsequently disqualified as a result of her immoral
actions (Saltzburg, Dealing With Juror

Jury Vs Jury
Kenneth Eade once said, "You never know with juries. I'd take a judge every time, unless of course I
was guilty." This quote stuck out because of the idea that it sets on what a judge and jury is. That he
knows the judge would call him guilty if he was, but there is doubt drawn to the jury. That is why
juries today need to be evaluated to determine the successfulness of it.
Juries date back to 1066 and some speculate even before then. Since then, it has varied between 6 or
12 jury members and this is isn't because of any serious flaws, it is just how it went(Hans and
Vidmar.) Juries are used to be the deciding factor in many different types of cases; murder, thievery,
abuse, or stealing. Juries are backed by many articles in the Constitution; such as Article III Section
2, The Sixth Amendment, and the Seventh Amendment. Article III Section Two states that "The trial
of all crimes shall be by jury and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes have been
committed." The Sixth Amendment guarantees and quick and speedy trial with an unbiased jury.
Finally, the Seventh Amendment states that with any crime above ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
A mock trial is when Lawyers take volunteers to make their "Jury" and then they use them to test
out possible ideas to help get a better understanding of how it will play out in court. Many times
they will try and find people who fit the profile of a jury member to better the results of the mock
trial. Another useful tool that they use is prepping the witness. This is extremely crucial because
lawyers will try and get the witnesses to say something that they wouldn't but in front of a court,
they get nervous. So it is up to someone to make sure the witness is ready to talk. They will often
ask them practice questions, have them give answers, and will also make sure they look presentable
in front of the Court to give off a better image of them and it helps at credibility to the

Jury Of Peers: The Jury System In America
The jury system in America proved to be successful over the last couple of centuries. This is
because the citizens of America form the jury, which in return provides a system that is fair. The
"jury of our peers" needs to be upheld because it is the most effective way of upholding justice in
the country. When random people are chosen to take part in the jury system and decide if a person is
guilty or not, it gives unbiased and right fair judgment for the defendant. A "jury of peers" is the
most successful way that justice can be decided unbiasedly, with protection for the defendant, and
also provide citizens with a sense of duty to their government.
A "jury of our peers" is a successful way of handling criminal cases because it requires every ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This is a sad reality in the jury system, as this could create a final verdict that was decided on too
quickly. Additionally, when a juror in a group is easily influenced, they will usually sway to the
verdict that the majority of the group believes. An easily influenced juror is unquestionably
unreliable for justice. In the film, "Twelve Angry Men" juror seven is the most inconstant and
wavering juror. He constantly follows the rest of the majority, just because he wants to leave and
does not care about the verdict. In the beginning of the film juror seven expresses, "I honestly think
the guy is guilty. Couldn't change my mind if you talked for 100 years." (Lumet, Twelve Angry
Men). However, his opinion later changes when the majority of the group reevaluates that the
defendant is not guilty. Later saying, "So I guess *I'll* have to break it up; I change my vote to "not
guilty."" (Lumet, Twelve Angry Men). Juror seven is all over the place with his opinions, and
ultimately follows the group, instead of thinking for himself. As seen in "Twelve Angry Men", an
inconsistent juror is an untrustworthy juror because they just follow the bandwagon even if facts say
otherwise. In our current system, inconsistencies are prevalent because of unprofessional jurors.
Therefore, a new system of professional jurors should be implemented because qualified jurors
understand

Queensland's Jury System
Juries are an essential component of Queensland's criminal justice system. However, the current jury
system in criminal law cases does not effectively meet the needs of society. This thesis is established
by first examining the role that juries play in the criminal justice system and the various interests of
those affected by juries. This is followed by a consideration of arguments for and against juries and
reforms that may be made to the jury system. Overall, it will be seen that there are substantial
reasons to reform the current system.
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 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The jury represents the voice of the people, regardless, juries are ethnically un–diverse, consist
heavily of certain age groups and members of certain socioeconomic statuses. To ensure better
representativeness, two specific reforms can be implemented. First, making avoiding jury duty more
difficult. The list of excuses in the Act can be reduced to achieve this. Additionally, the reforms must
address the racial diversity in juries. According to Israel, parties are likely to attempt to exclude
Indigenous and other ethnic minorities from in the selection process (1998). However, for the jury to
represent the voice of the people it must be racially diverse, as Australia is a very multicultural
country. As a result, a possible reform is making it more difficult for the parties to object to certain
jurors. To rectify the issue of a lack of competence in juries, a solution is to expand the kinds of
cases that a judge–only trials. At present, for example, complicated tax and fraud cases require a
judge–only trial. A reform is to make it possible for further kinds of cases to be added. An
alternative reform is to allow an independent lawyer to explain issues to the jury outside of court
sessions, rather than relying on the judges' instructions alone. The lawyer could identify any
misunderstandings and correct them. Overall, it is necessary for reforms to be put in place to address

Trial By Jury Essay
A Jury plays a necessary part in the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Trial by jury is
one of the ways that could be useful for reaching justice in the courts. The jury has 12 citizens who
are chosen randomly from different genders and different ages. (The Guardian, 2005) the jurors
work is to help the judge to a make decision about the case so the lawyers show them the evidence
and anything related to the case and then the jurors will try to make the right judgment whether the
criminal is guilty or not. People argue that they want the trial without the jury system because it is
not fair enough and there are other reasons such as the jurors do not have enough experience, jury
system is not fairest form of justice, they do not represent the society and jury ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
For instance, the juror could take bribe from the criminal to be in his or hers side. An example can
be mentioned here is the case of Vybz Kartel. According to AP NEWS (2013) there was a male juror
arrested because he tried to bribe the jury foreman to release Vybz Kartel (BBC NEWS 2014).
However, the chance of being corrupted for the jury is less than the judge. For example, it is
difficult to have 12 corrupted jurors as well as even the judge can be corrupted. According to BBC
NEWS (2013), the judge Akil Mochtar has been arrested regarding acceptance of taking a bribe of
£154,000.
Finally, there is an argument confirmed that, the jury system cost too much money. So to clarify this
argument Brian Kelly in the BBC NEWS mentioned that, the jury trial costs more than £8,000 per
day. Also Guy Hammond from the BBC NEWS said, "I realise that the court system is costing
taxpayers millions" so it is cost too much money (BBC NEWS ,2001). However, the argument
against this say that the high cost of the jury system is the price of the justice so it does not matter
how much it will cost (BBC NEWS,

Essay On Jury Nullification
Racially Based Jury Nullification
Jury Nullification
Criminal trials depend on the jury's decision on whether a defendant is guilty or not of the crimes
they are charged with. After examining the evidence and testimony during the trail, the jury will
decide if the defendant broke the law. A judge will give specific instructions to follow, and the laws
that govern the proceedings of the case.
The jury may disagree with the law and instructions the judge have given them over the course of
the trial. Jury nullification occurs when all of the evidence shows the defendant committed a crime,
and the jury finds them not guilty based on some racial inequality. The jury chose to ignore the
evidence and the law and return a not guilty ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
She continues her argument by stating, disadvantaged black women are being targeted for
prosecution not for abusing an unborn child, but because they are targeted for being poor black
women. "A policy that attempts to protect fetuses by denying the humanity of their mothers will
inevitably fail. A commitment to guaranteeing these fundamental rights of poor women of color,
rather than punishing them, is the real solution to the problem of unhealthy babies" (Roberts, 1991,
p.1482).
Randall Kennedy's analysis
Kennedy argues that the analysis Roberts stated "unconstitutional racial discrimination that are often
made by opponents of prosecutions have not been persuasively substantiated" (Kennedy, 1997,
p.363). Kennedy further questions the hypothetical issue of the deprivation of "black babies of equal
protection of the law is trapped by a reflexive animosity to law enforcement and an inattentiveness
to its essential function as a protector of the weak" (Kennedy, 1997, p.363).
Roberts's response fails to satisfy the individuals that cocaine affects the most. Fetal endangerment
requires further study and Roberts fails to identify the "amalgam of racial and class biases"
(Kennedy, 1997, p.361) in illicit drug use to determine who is in

Jury Process
The Jury Selection Process
Taurean F Dawkins
Strayer University
Huntsville, AL
February 10, 2013
Abstract
"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 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In order to serve on this jury each of the potential juror had to fill out a number of different items.
First, each potential juror had to complete 79–page questionnaires that contained 294 questions
(Ford & Newton 1994). This questionnaire had questions pertaining the prosecution and the
defense. In addition, each candidate had to complete a one–page "hardship" questionnaire (Ford
& Newton 1994). Due to this difficult process the jury selection took two months to finish. By
using this method it ensured that OJ Simpson received a fair trial and know one would be biased to
his situation. Another example that we could review with a rigorous jury selection process would be
the Michael Jackson case in 2011. The defendant in the case was Dr. Conrad Murray. Dr. Murray
was accused and convicted for manslaughter because he gave Michael Jackson a powerful
anesthetic and abandoned him. The pool of perspective jurors started with 145 people (Duke, 2011).
With the prosecution and defense using their peremptory challenges, they narrow the juror list down
to 84 potential jurors (Duke, 2011). In order to further investigate, each candidate had to fill out a
questionnaire that contained 113 different questions (Duke, 2011). The prosecution and defense had
a week in order to review the questions from each juror. Each side was allowed twenty minutes in
order to question each potential juror and determine if they would be a good fit for this problematic
case. By using this

Are Juries Fair
Are juries fair?
Cheryl Thomas
Ministry of Justice Research Series 1/10 February 2010
Are juries fair?
Cheryl Thomas
This information is also available on the Ministry of Justice website:
www.justice.gov.uk/publications/research.htm
Constitution and Access to Justice – Analytical Services supports effective policy development
and delivery within the Ministry of Justice by providing high–quality social research, statistics and
economic analysis to influence decision–making and encourage informed debate.
© Crown Copyright 2010.
Extracts from this document may be reproduced for non–commercial purposes on condition that the
source is acknowledged.
First Published 2010
ISBN: 978 1 84099 326 4 ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
5. 6.
Implications Further research Additional resources
References Appendix 1:
Appendix 3:
All pleas and jury verdicts at all Crown Courts 2006–08 by defendant ethnicity (at charge level) 61

Appendix 4:
Relationship between defendant, juror and local population ethnicity for all Crown Courts in
England and Wales 62
Appendix 5:
Analytical model for analysis of impact of ethnicity on verdict (court effects) 65
List of tables
2.1: 2.2: 2.3: Sample size in case simulation study Sample size for CREST data analysis Sample
size for media reporting and internet study 9 10 12
3.1:
Crown Court charges by ethnicity of defendant and offence type: 2006–08 (n=551,669)
21
3.2: 3.3:
Jury verdicts for White defendants charged with racial offences: 2006–08 All charges, pleas and
verdicts in Crown Courts: 2006–08
25 27
A3.1: All pleas on charges by defendant ethnicity A3.2: All outcomes where juries deliberated by
defendant ethnicity
61 61
A4.1: BME population, jurors and defendants in the London Region A4.2: BME population, jurors
and defendants in the South Eastern Region A4.3: BME population, jurors and defendants in the
Midlands Region A4.4: BME population, jurors and defendants in the North East Region A4.5:
BME population, jurors and defendants in the Northern Region A4.6: BME population, jurors and
defendants in the Wales & Chester Region A4.7: BME population, jurors

Jury Trial
A jury trial (or trial by jury) is a legal proceeding in which a jury either makes a decision or makes
findings of fact which are then applied by a judge.
|Advantages |Disadvantages |
|Provides certainty, no retrial (subject to recent reforms but only |On acquittal (оправдание) there
can be no retrial (subject to recent |
|for serious crimes). |reforms but only for serious crimes). |
|Retrial available in tainted cases (nobbling) Section 54 Criminal |Jury nobbling believed to be
frequent resulting in wrongful acquittals. | ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
|
|Many judges believe jurors usually return the right verdict, very few|Easily influenced by
impressive barristers, or the judge. |
|appeals from jury verdicts. | |
| | |
|High correlation in USA studies of jury/judge verdicts. |Juries not required to give reasons for
verdicts. |
|Judge can correct any unfairness of the array. |Insufficient intellect. Cannot follow complicated tax
or fraud cases. |
| |Note: can be judge–only trial in some cases. |
|Provide a barometer of public opinion. |Inconsistencies throughout the country. |
| | |
| |Young jurors no

Juries in NSW Essay
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.
However, the jury system is still very important to the justice system.
The role of the jury in NSW
A jury is a group of people from the community with all sorts of backgrounds, beliefs, religions,
education levels and ages, who listens to the evidence of the cases and helps the court to decide the
outcome of the cases. Jury duty in NSW is a very important responsibility, providing a link between
the justice system and the community.
The role of the jury in criminal ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The jury will listen to the arguments of both parties and come to a decision whether the respondent
should pay or not to pay the plaintiff. If the jury decides that the respondent must pay the plaintiff,
the magistrate or the judge will decide on the amount of money that should be paid to make up for
the dept, injury, or damage.
Eligibility for jury service in NSW
Anyone in the community who is enrolled in the State electoral roll is eligible to participate in the
jury service. The jury system gives people from the community a chance to participate in the justice
system. Therefore people whose occupation involves around the government and legal system such
as the governor, judge/magistrate, lawyer, police officer or prison officer cannot participate in jury
service. Also people who has bee convicted of a serious crime or has been sentenced to prison are
not allowed to participate. People who cannot read speak or understand English also cannot take
part. If a person has some kind of connection with the person accused, they must step down. If a
person participated in a jury service during the last 12 months, they will not be able to participate
again for 3 years.
Jury selection
Jurors are randomly chosen by the NSW sheriff from a list of people from the electoral role who
appears to be eligible to take part in the service. If you have been

The Trial On The Jury System
Introduction
Have you ever been to a trial or have you seen a trial on the television? Have you ever saw that
group of people that were sitting in a box? Or have you ever heard someone say they have to go do
jury duty? You may wondered what jury duty is. Well jury duty is service as a member of a jury in a
court of law. You may say well what is a jury? A jury is a body of people sworn to give to give a
verdict in a legal case on the basis of evidence submitted to them in court. In this paper we will talk
about three counties and how their jury system goes. And if they don't have one we will talk about
what they do for their judicial system. Jury system makes the court's trial easier and fair.
United States Jury System The United ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
After the reviewing of the questionnaire the court will randomly select those who will be summoned
to jury duty. (Criminal Find Law) Everyone must do jury duty once every 12 months. There will be
a $1500 fine if you do not show up and perform your duty. There is two reasons on why you could
be excused. One reason is if they have a physical or mental impairment. The other reason is if
attending will cause a financial burden. (US Courts) To be on jury duty you won't have to
understand English 100% you must understand it enough to be able to know what is going on. The
court uses the common language. But if you cannot understand the language at all then you could
call in or have someone to translate for you when you call into the local jury department. There is a
chance that you will need to go down there to prove that you don't speak the language. (California
State Law)
Mexico Jury System
Mexico did not commonly use the jury system. The judicial protection is provided by the Writ of
Amparo. The Writ of Amparo allows the person convicted in the court of a local judge to appeal to
one of the federal judges. There trial system is based on by the Napoleonic Code. It consist of a sees
of fact gathering hearings. The judges are appointed for life. (Mex Online) The record of the
proceedings is not available to the public. That was forced on March 21, 1804. The legal system
came about in 1806. In 1808 a code of criminal instruction was

Jury Duty In Canada's Jury System
In Canada, jurors are poorly paid and most of the times, jurors suffer from personal hardship. In
Ontario, A juror gets virtually no payment for the first 10 days of work and $50/day for the next 39
days and $100 a day after that. What's more, the jurors are expected to cough up money for parking.
Add to it, the price of gas, the daily trip to the courthouse can be really expensive for a long trial.
("Opinion | EDITORIAL: Jury duty is legalized theft", 2011) Individuals fortunate enough to work
for an employer with generous welfares might receive their regular salaries, but most jurors get
nothing more than a promise that their job will be there when they come back to work at the end of
the trial. (Stastna, 2012) Such minor payment places an unfair burden on the people who have to
serve on juries and is a significant limitation of Canada's jury system. ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
("Opinion | EDITORIAL: Jury duty is legalized theft", 2011) Every week across the country,
thousands of Canadians receive a summons to appear in a court to perform jury duty. Every week,
judges give intense speeches to the gathered displeased panel of prospective jurors to persuade them
that serving on a jury is their civic duty, that they should be willing to give up their salary, to be part
of the justice system. (Stastna, 2012) This situation has been in place for decades. Trial by jury is a
fundamental part of our justice system. But it should not be functioned in a way that penalizes the
jurors. Every year, people who are convicted of a crime receives millions of dollars for legal aid
lawyers, but a little is given to taxpaying Canadians who sit on

Advantages Of The Jury System
The jury system of a trial is an essential element of the democratic process. Some people think that
the American jury system is not a good thing because you are going off other peoples opinions, on
the other hand people think it is a good thing because they say that is a fair way to make a decision
in court. A jury group is a group of citizens which hears the testimony in legal disputes and
determines what it believes is the truth. In court, we settle criminal law, and civil law cases with jury
members to help. I personally think that the American jury system is still a good and helpful thing to
use.
One reason why I think the jury system is still a good thing to use during a court case is that, normal
citizens get called to a trial, decide on a case, and try to persuade the judge about whether or not the
defendant is guilty or innocent. Another good thing is that none of the reasoning is biased, which
means all of the facts/reasoning the jury members are giving isn't opinionated. People that have
observed jury systems say that it has remarked the ability to help ordinary citizens into self–
governors and get involved in civic participation. The trial by jury process puts the people in
control. The people have ultimate control in the legislative and executive branches. (Doc C)
In some cases, the jury system being what they use can be debatable. I think it is always what you
should use to determine if the defendant is guilty or innocent during a trial. The jury system

Jury Duty 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, ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
However when it is time to deliberate and come to an important verdict, these same people have a
hard time making impartial and fair decisions because the many prior misconceptions that they
possess. It is impossible for anyone to be completely impartial and fair, especially with inadequate
knowledge of the law. It can take only one partial, and unfair person to change the whole outcome
of the verdict.
"Today, jurors sometimes leave courtrooms in tears after convicting people they believed were
morally (if not legally) innocent, or after witnessing the harsh sentences handed down by judges at
the sentencing phase of seemingly minor cases. That is exactly the sort of travesty trial by jury was
intended to prevent. If the law were just and justly applied, jurors would have no reason to regret
their verdicts, or the sentences that are meted out later by judges." (Trial by Jury Website) This
would seemingly encourage the American judicial system to adapt the jury system to meet the needs
of our current American society. It is unpleasant for the jurors to make very hard choices concerning
the lives of other fellow citizens. It is also hard for the persons who are standing trial to know that
their fate is going to rest with people with little or no knowledge of the law.
The jury causes a great waste of time. It has been pointed out that a trial by jury usually requires two
to three times the amount of time

Jury Themes
I particularly enjoyed this movie due to the several themes presented in it such as justice, class,
prejudice, and doubt. From the beginning, I thought that the accused would get the death penalty
because most of the jurors had inflicted prejudices which demonstrates how the jury system could
be in some ways corrupt.. However, at the end the accused was acquitted. I also liked the cast
because each of those twelve men had a different character and different perceptions. Even if the
entire movie takes place on the jury room, it was still a perfect movie due to the story and the acting
of all the actors. In addition, some funny scenes made the movie even more enjoyable and not
boring. In brief, I really liked the movie because it shows how

Jury Trial Advantages
Introduction:
Juries form an important part of our legal system and are made up of ordinary people from our
community. A jury trial is a legal proceeding in which a jury, made up of twelve individuals, makes
a decision that then directs the actions of a judge. A jury is randomly chosen from a list of voter
registrations and driver licence ID renewals. Once the jury is chosen they participate in both
criminal trials and civil trials. In criminal trials the jury hears evidence and makes a decision as to
whether the person is guilty or innocent. Civil trials that need juries are usually defamation
proceedings. But are twelve heads better than one? During this report, I will critically analyse and
evaluate the two conflicting viewpoints contained in the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This can be seen as one of the advantages to a jury trial. Another advantage, is that the decision is
made by twelve people rather than just a judge. A jury trial may not always be the best choice
though; there are many disadvantages to a jury trial. A jury trial, may consist of people such as,
construction workers or stay at home mums and therefore, they may not be able to understand
complex laws and forensic evidence. This is one of the biggest disadvantages to having a jury trial.
Another disadvantage is that every juror has their own personal beliefs that can affect their decision.
For example, someone who comes to court not well dressed may already be considered guilty in
jurors that hold appearance in high regard. The jury system itself has many problems and issues. For
example, some trials can last for days or even months and therefore the jury must remain an
audience for the entire duration listening to arguments and evidence. Sometimes it becomes too long
for them. Katrina Blowers, a journalist working for ABC news, has often seen jurors falling asleep
on the job, others distracted by passing notes to each other,

Jury Barristers
Barristers A Barrister speaks in court and presents the case before a Judge and the Jury. The
Barrister has to receive additional training in the evidence Law and also in court practice and
procedure. The Barrister is there to show whether or not the Defendant is innocent or whether the
Defendant is guilty. There are two Barristers that have to be in the court one is called a Defence
Barrister and they have to make sure that their client is protected and that the client is proven
innocent at the end of the trail. Then the second Barrister is called a Prosecuting Barrister whose job
is to make sure that the Defendant is shown guilty at the end of the trail. Solicitors A Solicitor has a
lot that they have to do they have to do all of the legal research and Drafting legal documents so that
when they are in court all of the research that they have found out is suitable for the court. Leading
client meetings this is so that they can inform the client of the information that they have been able
to find out that client and to see if any of the information may cause a problem when they are in
court. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
For example many paralegals case research, manage cases and assist with clients. The paralegal
must abide by the same client attorney confidentiality. Paralegal must be supervised by an attorney
and must abide by limitations Legal Executives Legal Executives work in Solicitors offices often
doing many of the things that the Solicitors have to do one of the things that they may have to do is
take instructions from the clients and prepare witnesses statements for the court day. They may
attend the court however they don't have the rights of advocacy in the same way as Solicitors but
they have some rights in the lower courts. After being a Legal Executives for five years then they
can become

Jury Defense
will become clear in the interview video. It was then time for Jorge's attorneys to go before the jury,
and he stood when the prosecutor took her seat. To begin to believe the defense given by Jorge's
attorney was powerful or persuasive is giving it too much credit. In my opinion the structure and
delivery of all of his points that I will describe only further supported the opposing sides arguments.
He began his statements by saying everything was misconstrued and was simply a misunderstanding
given by the child. He then went on to describe the roommate (taking blame from Jorge) and how it
was their fault for not speaking up about any awkward situations that may have arisen in the past.
He invested time talking about the 'rules of the house' ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The process of the various statements given and the ability to convey such a strong message to the
jury is the job of the attorney. In my open opinion, the evidence and statements given could not be
outweighed by Jorge's attorney in any way. This was aided by the fact that he was not able to
support his arguments and all odds were against him. The courts system of relaying evidence to the
jury and giving the people a right to choose what they honestly believe to be the truth of the
situation is what todays judicial system is based upon. This was enlightening to me to see happen
and I am content with what I have witnessed. Following this case, I was able to find two more that
were similar in nature. The first being People v. Dontanville 10 Cal. App. 3d 783; 89 Cal. Rptr. 172;
1970 Cal. App. LEXIS

Roles Of The Jury
Twelve men and women appointed to a case are known as the "Jury" of that case. This jury must
take care in rendering a decision, their own experiences and emotions may play a role in their
decision and they also must take their time and consider all options before agreeing if the defendant
is innocent or guilty. The men and women on the jury must take so much care in rendering a
decision because, depending on the crime, the rest of someone's life may be on the line. If the roles
were reversed and a jury member were in the place of the defendant, they would want whomever
was on the jury to take the time and consider every piece of evidence and think of every statement
that was said. The defendant is innocent until proven guilty, the

The Jury System Essay
The right to trial by jury in the modern times originates from twelfth century England during the
reign of King Henry II. This system may originate from an "ancient right for an accused to be tried
only "by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land"" (Thomas). In the United
States, trial by jury is mentioned in Article Three of the Constitution and the Fifth, Sixth, and
Seventh Amendments. For many people, the jury system seems to be the fairest system and most
unbiased way of determining a person's innocence or guilt. The system is to make sure that all
receive fair trial despite their race, gender, national origin, religion, political affiliation, or color.
Jury service is distinct in being the only form of civic ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The grand juries are not only done in private but the proceedings are not for public observation.
Petit juries are made up of six to twelve members, while grand juries from sixteen to twenty–three.
Jurors are selected at random and must be an American citizen. To qualify, jurors must also be over
the age of eighteen, lived in the judicial district for a year, proficient English skills, and no mental or
physical conditions. The juror must have also not have any felony charges punishable by
imprisonment for more than a year or have been convicted of a felony. Active military members,
officers, firemen, and government officials are exempt from jury service. Being summoned also
does not guarantee that one will serve for the judge and attorneys will ask a number of questions to
determine if the individual is sustainable. In all types of cases, juries must unanimously vote on a
verdict except in civil cases where they can be non–unanimous. A law not told to jurors is the power
of nullification. Knowledge of this law may prevent someone from serving on a jury and the
acknowledgement in certain circumstances may get a person arrested. This power actually exist
outside the law for it exist due to two other laws, where juries cannot be punished for a "wrong"
decision and a not–guilty defendant cannot be tried for the same crime. This is where the jury says
"guilty" or "not–guilty", but they think differently. Though guilty verdicts can be

The Corruption Of The Jury System In The Jury System?
The current jury system in America is unfortunately corrupt because of unprofessional jurors that
are the deciding factor for cases. The "jury of our peers" system does not promote fair justice and it
should be replaced with a new system of professional jurors. The current system allows random,
unqualified individuals to make irresponsible decisions for our government. If unqualified jurors
were replaced with professional jurors, our system would become successful. A professional system
of jurors is an efficient way for justice to be decided because the current system allows jurors to be
uneducated on law, inconsistent with experience, and bias based on their opinions.
A "jury of peers" is unreliable because the current system allows jurors to be uneducated in law.
Consequently, when jurors do not have the proper training or information available to them, they
could make rash and unqualified decisions. This is seen in the movie, "12 Angry Men" when Juror
seven does not even show interest in the case because he has his mind on baseball. As a result of
this, Juror eleven expresses, "What kind of man are you? You have sat here and voted guilty with
everyone else because there are some baseball tickets burning a hole in your pocket." In the film,
Juror seven is only on the jury because he is obligated to be there, not because he feels like he has a
responsible duty to his government. This example is a perfect display of why the whole idea of
normal citizens making jury decisions is unreliable. A lot of the time in society, jury duty is looked
down upon as a waste of time to normal citizens. Some jurors, like juror seven in "12 Angry Men",
just want jury duty to be over with, and do not even care about justice. Which is why professional
jurors would be a much better choice for our legal system because they would understand the law
and make decisions based on justice. Reasonable doubt on untrained and unqualified jurors is
obvious because most jurors rely on their personal opinions in cases instead of honest facts.
Consequently, an uneducated jury might cause a verdict to become unjust and ingenuine.
Jurors in our current system have inconsistencies because they either have little experience or are
easily

The Jury Of A Jury
Jury Paper The concept of juries dates back to the eighth century. Instead of it being an impartial
body of unbiased people, juries interrogated prisoners. It was not until the fourteenth century that
juries would start to become what we know them today. About three million people are called to
serve jury duty every year in the United States. On average only 1.2 million actually serve their
request according to the American Bar Association. A jury is picked from a jury pool. The jury pool
is made up of around sixty people. These sixty people are questioned and screened by both lawyers
to weed out any that are to bias toward the subject of the case. The first part of jury is picking one
person to speak for everyone, they are known as the ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Juries in other countries are not quite like ours. In the United Kingdom they do not have a grand
jury. If the judge or police feels that the crime is serious enough it is sent straight to a jury trial.
Other countries such as Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have started to adopt the concept as
well. Other than this a jury trial is set up relatively the same as they are in the United States. Both
sides are able to present evidence to a jury and the jury discusses and comes up with a verdict. A
former New York judge, Sol Wathtler, once said "A district attorney could get a grand jury to indict
a ham sandwich." (Hans, 2008). This is because a prosecution is able to get a jury to believe
anything due to they are able to present evidence such as hearsay and illegally obtained evidence
that wouldn't be used in a jury trial. The defense is not allowed to be in the court when a grand jury
is in session, that is the reason the prosecution is able to present that evidence. This is one major
reason why many countries stopped showing cases in a grand jury. In the United States .027 percent
of trial by juries are tried unfairly. That gives our justice system a 99.973 percent success rate
according to researchers from National Geographic (Hughes, 2014). In a case known as the
Affluenza Teen; teenager Ethan Couch

Jury Diversity
1) The jury in this film is relatively diverse. Although on the whole diversity spectrum it isn't, we
see diversity in the age ranges of the jury members and in their different classes, and levels of
education. The diversity helps the team in the aspect that it helps seem jury members see differently
to others. It allowed some of them to give the defendant a chance and understand the circumstances
he had be brought up in and the lifestyle he'd lived in. An example would be when the kid was
called slum by certain jury members whereas others gave him a chance. Only different upbringings
and understandings would enable that understanding.
2) There were numerous examples of bias in the film. One example is when the defendant got
labelled a 'delinquent', ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
There is a natural leader (8), a formal leader (1), someone who fancies themselves (7), the
argumentative type (3), the carefree person who sits back (12), the weaker character (2). You will
often find in large groups that these are roles individuals can plan judging from personal experience.
11) I do not think there were any examples of social loafing in the movie.
12) I thought the closest thing to a devil's advocate was Jury member eleven. Even though he did
not play a huge part, when he did he posed a lot of questions to the group in a way that invited a lot
of thought from them, he came across as very intellectual and thought a bit more outside the box
and tried to pose these thoughts to others.
13) At the start the trust level was minimal. Most of them blindly voted guilty and when jury
member eight pointed that out and some of them started to realize that there was a lot of distrust. I
think the level of trust changed at about the half way point when the votes were beginning to tie. I
think this was because some of them were realizing there was another side to this story and that it
was worth listening to than simply

Jury Duty
Why is asking for help such a difficult thing to do? Is it difficult for you? It is for me. This past
week I was summoned for jury duty. My husband was out of town, I had called in 4 times and had
been put on "standby" so I thought I was going to be dismissed. And then I wasn't. At 6pm, I found
out I had to appear at 7:30am the next day. I had a yoga class to teach at 8am and Lucas had to be at
school by 8:30. My parents and In–laws don't live in town and I was pretty sure that I was not going
to be able to clone myself. So, I sat. And I stewed. And I got a bit teary out of frustration. And then I
asked for help. And, OF COURSE, Miguel and Anjelica were MORE than happy to help. Their son
and mine are besties and "wouldn't this be great to hang out before going to school". Disaster
averted. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Ugh. The next one? " I don't want to be a "BURDEN." Double UGH. And after I got off the phone, I
thought "that was SO easy. Why do I TORTURE myself before picking up that phone???" I mean, if
the tables were turned, I would most certainly help out... NO QUESTION. Are there areas that you
need help or support but you aren't asking for it? Here are a series of questions for you to ponder.
{You really should get a journal if you are going to read my blog... you are going to want it and it's
SUPER helpful when you want to come back to re–visit questions and

The American Jury System
Denise Nguyen
Mr.Laterza
Envisions Period 5AC
12 February 2016
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.
Those a part of the American jury system tend to base their decisions on opinions rather than
actually analyzing the facts. Those on the jury may not be qualified to acquit someone. In the novel
written by Mark Twain he asserts that even though people on the jury take an oath, but they ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
On one hand many critics argue that the American jury system is no longer a good idea. On the
other hand, some may disagree and say the American jury system is still a good idea. According to
this view, one can readily agree that the American jury system gives the people a say in what is
relevant to today. "The role of jury service in promoting self–governance and civic
participation...the United States Constitution viewed jury service as a critically important feature of
self–governance and enshrined [guaranteed] the right to serve on juries in the Seventh Amendment"
(Document C). While the essence of John Weiser is that the jury system promotes civic
participation, such a stance is invalid because their judgement can be clouded. Therefore, even
though the American jury system does have its benefits, the jurors choice whether the convicted
should be punished can be

Jury Acquittal
Key Terms:
CSI effect, Jury acquittals, Perceived realism, Eyewitness testimony, Forensic television programs
Focus of Study:
The focus of this study depicts the general public perception of the jury selected member's decision–
making process in a criminal justice system after viewing CSI–like drama shows. These shows may
have influenced how they perceive criminal law and forensic realism by associating it with crime
drama television known as the "CSI effect".
Methodology:
Participants in this study were 119 undergraduate students from a Canadian university. Gender
selection was 36 males and 83 women with ages ranging from 18 to 51 years. As an incentive, the
Canadian university psychology department awarded the participants with course

American Jury History
A jury is a certain number of men or women, selected by law, grouped together to decide the verdict
of a case. ("What is JURY?") They play an important role in our system of justice. In the United
State a jury hears testimony and evidence of the case to determine if that is enough to move
forward. Over the years the jury system has evolved immensely and has improved. Roles have
become different, some roles in the jury system have been discontinued and others have been added.
In the early days of the American jury, many of the laws and roles were modeled after British
Parliamentary and English common law. (Hans, Valerie P.) It was expected to do this seeing as this
is what type of system colonists were familiar with. However, they were rebels ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
There are criminal grand juries and civil/criminal petit juries (Types of Jury) The United States is
the only country that uses grand juries in criminal indictment. Grand juries played a huge role in
public issues in the early years of the country. Grand juries were able to conduct investigations
following a citizen bringing a matter to them. They handled anything from repairs for public works,
a public officials conduct, and complaint of crime. (Types of Jury) They served as a screening tool
to see which cases were worth handling and which were malicious/incompetent. Petit juries are
made of up to 12 people. In a civil case, petit jury listens to evidence and decides if the defendant
has harmed or failed to complete a legal duty to the plaintiff. They decide if the defendant has done
what they have been charged for. (About Jury Service) In a criminal case, if a person is accused of a
crime that is punishable by incarceration for more than six months it is their constitutional right to
trial by jury. However, if it is less than six months trial by jury is not required and the state can
decide whether or not to proceed with a trial. (Case Management and the Criminal Procedure Rules.

The Jury System
The Jury System
The ideas discussed in this article show some extremely important parts of the judicatory in the state
of Kansas. There are some advantages and disadvantages of this system of the judicatory. The article
says that the "jury service is one of the most valuable public services that a citizen has an
opportunity to perform", but I think it is not. The United States has many precious public services
such as voting, which shows the participation of the citizens to build their destinations in the society.
In this article, the author says that "the performance of jury service is the fulfillment of a most
important civil obligation", and I agree because in this way the citizens can express how much their
country is important for them,

Essay On Jury Tampering

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Featured

Featured (20)

Essay On Jury Tampering