Preview

Is the American Jury System still a Goo

Satisfactory Essays
Open Document
Open Document
370 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Is the American Jury System still a Goo
CIs the America Jury System still a Good Idea? ountries that have never had a jury system, or have had one in the past, have turned to citizens to decide criminal cases. The jury system could be helpful, but it can also be a huge problem in a serious case. A Jury is a group of citizens which hears the testimony in legal disputes and determines what it believes is the truth. Jury trials should remain an option. Without Juries in my opinion it would be totally unfair to go off of what one person thinks. There are 3 main reasons why the jury system should remain an option.
The jury system could be helpful in very difficult cases. One reason why jury trials should remain an options is it helps promotes civic virtues. Civic virtue is morality or a standard of righteous behavior in relationship to a citizen's involvement in society. The jury system helps citizens get involved with the community. Another reason why jury trials should remain options is that it lets citizens participate in judicial branch. Serving on a jury allows you to become better informed about your courts and the laws. The jury system helps you understand your rights also. By being on jury you are extending you knowledge while helping the judge find out the truth. Finally a third reason why the jury system is still a good idea is because it usually works. During deliberation the jurors are usually doing what they supposed to do by gathering the evidence in the case it helps to let an innocent person go or a guilty person pay. Because a jury consists of multiple people from diverse backgrounds, it can arrive at a better verdict than can one person acting alone. It is true that one could make a reasonable argument that’s jury trials is no longer a good idea. Due to the lack of attention that’s actually paid by the jurors, any might say it’s pointless. However the opposite case is stronger America jury system is still a good ideas, just because some people don’t actually play their part in

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    “Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe”(Douglas). The American judicial system which has undergone many changes since its colonial times has evolved with the changing times to reflect a modern society, however even with the changes that the judicial system has undergone it still faces a key critical point that continues to undermine the laws and justices from which our society is based. The glaring point is the differentiating treatment between the rich and the poor. In the judicial system the rich are given substantial leniency with corresponding…

    • 1093 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are various problems inherent in the current death penalty system. The system is broken. The death penalty should find more effective ways to determine guilt. If not, the killing of innocent people will continue. The first aspect that should be changed is the selection and biasness of the jury, especially racial bias in jury selection. The Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution forbids the government from imposing "cruel and unusual punishments”. The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment, especial to ones that are innocent. They ultimately die in…

    • 1182 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The jury system is simply a system in which the verdict in a legal case is decided by a group of twelve regular citizens(the jurors). A lot of questions have been asked about the validity and importance of the jury system. I think the jury system is not a good idea and should therefore be removed because the jurors sometimes do not consider or even understand the evidence provides. They often let their personal feelings affect their verdict, or base it on unreasonable factors, and…

    • 448 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    By allowing a certain selected amount of people to be a jury I do not feel as if though we are promoting an environment that does not discriminate. This will further help create a divide between the country, and that is not something that we want to increase.…

    • 283 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    From the use of a judge to listen to both sides of the trial, to the impartial jury that is used to decide the verdict of the trial. Everyone in the courtroom is there to offer a fair, and safe trial for whomever may have charges brought against them. It may be true that there are many things within the Criminal Justice system that may not work efficiently or even effectively, however there is nothing that is perfect. There is something to be said when it comes to the American Justice system; it gets many things right when it comes to equal rights and fairness for the American…

    • 1288 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The role the jury trial plays in criminal cases is fundamental to the American scheme of justice.1 The right to a jury trial is rooted in our legal tradition2 and is articulated in the U.S. Constitution.3 This protection extends back to British common law, and serves as a check against government oppression by ensuring that a defendant’s fate lies in the hands of a jury of ordinary citizens rather than the government’s prosecutor or judge.4 Coupled with the presumption of innocence, the right to a jury trial serves as a “cornerstone of Anglo-Saxon justice”5 that limits potential government tyranny. At the heart of jury trial protections and the presumption of innocence lies the concern that it is better to let a guilty man go free than to convict an innocent man.6…

    • 8780 Words
    • 36 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    If life truly is what you or we the people make it than we are all guilty of negligence and selfish immaturity. The existence of our civil liberty is under constant threat and that is something that should never be allowed to go on with such neglect. Laws should not only protect the rights, freedoms, and safety of the people but also should enhance the civil liberty of those who are expected to uphold such laws. This is why we have a jury and this is why the jury possesses the power of responsibility to protect civil liberty at all costs. The handbook for trial jurors serving in the United States District Courts clearly states and touches on the importance of jury service. It says that jurors maintain a vital role in our justice system and the protection of our rights and liberties is largely achieved through the teamwork of judge and jury who, working together in a common effort, put into practice the principles of our great heritage of freedom. It also goes on to say the judge determines the law to be applied in the case while the jury decides the facts. Thus, in a very important way, jurors become a part of the court itself. Jurors must be men and women possessed of sound judgment, absolute honesty, and a complete sense of fairness. Jury service is a high duty of citizenship. Jurors aid in the maintenance of law and order and uphold justice among their fellow citizens. In addition to determining and adjusting property rights, jurors may also be asked to decide questions involving a crime for which a person may be fined, placed on probation, or confined in prison. In a very real sense, therefore, the people must rely upon jurors…

    • 1019 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Since it has been used righteously in the past it is a hard decision to contemplate getting rid of it. If there was no jury nullification of any kind then the country would have missed out on juries taking a stand against poorly thought out laws. The answer is that jury nullification has played a dual roll in our history. At times it is a useful tool as in the cases involving slavery or differential prosecution, at times allowing racists to go free. So having weighed the merits of the situation it is best left as is currently. There is a real risk for overuse if everyone were aware of the power but in its absence the government would exercise too much power unbalanced by the power of the…

    • 1234 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This prevents them from making decisions based on what they saw someone do and not what they believe is right. Instead of basing their decisions on other court cases, they can make proper judgements on the current case and be open minded and not bias. Additionally, although various court cases are similar, there is always something different. So relying on a different case to make your decision will make the jury blind to the different facts presented. This will cause the jury to make wrong decisions even when the defendant or plaintiff proves their side. This shows that it is lawful for a judge to prevent the jury from being influenced by other…

    • 487 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    There are many arguments for what the rule should be. Consider the money, effort and release of guilty people because a crafty lawyer twists facts to persuade just one of 12 people that there is something wrong with the case? However, these costs seem to be outweighed by the value we gain from the unanimous verdict system. It really seems like a small price to pay when the alternative is potentially locking away an innocent person which is like stealing someone’s life. The requirement structures deliberations in ways that are consistent with our democratic ideals and enhances the sense of legitimacy that attaches to criminal verdicts. (Bove, 259-260) One would think that if it were difficult to achieve unanimity that the jurors would only have to continue deliberating the case. This would give the jurors a greater insight into other sides and possibly even help them gain a greater perspective on the subject. This could lead to jurors changing their vote, but it would generally be for the better because the more insight you have minus anyone’s possible prejudices, the less likely a group is of making a poor decision. A process as…

    • 856 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Both sides of legal dispute have the rights and are entitles under the Constitution to request a jury trial. When judge decides on a case without a jury, it is considered a bench trial. Judge usually takes on two roles and are the “referee” to rule the admissibility of evidence and decides a resolution that can determine credibility based on evidence (Hg Legal Resources, 2017). The advantages to a jury trial is the amount of money that jury award and ruling is based on passion whereas a judge rule based on evidence (Hg Legal Resources, 2017). The disadvantage to a jury trial is selecting a panel and utilizing a licensed attorney during this process (Hg Legal Resources, 2017). Also, finding the right attorney to handle the case is the key to a…

    • 590 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Despite the justice system making decisions to benefit the majority, there will always be some who disagree with the resolution of the jury. Furthermore, people vary in many ways, so the one view of the justice system is not going to satisfy everyones views. Is the justice system…

    • 1372 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Right To Trial By Jury

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Right to Trial by Jury is where the accused has the right to a public trial, lawyer, to know who the accusers are, what you are accused for, and a jury. The statement that has been said was that this Right should be changed by “Trial By Justices”. Trial By Justices means that cases are decided by the decisions of Judicial Officials.…

    • 378 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Clearly there is a place for jury nullification in the US. There has been a long history of unfair laws and practices in the country and allowing the jury the power to overturn or nullify them is a good way to keep the government in check. (Jones, 2004), but many still are against the concept. The real question is more about race-based nullification. Should race be a factor when juries consider nullification as an option? The answer to this is complicated if a jury really feels that a defendant was targeted unfairly based on race shouldn't they have some power to affect the trial. (Butler, 1995) Also without a complete revamping of the legal system how would one go about fixing the problem? Can nullification be eliminated with our current system, probably not. Law makers and groups who are against this feel that the concept is no longer being used for what it was originally intended for and there are individuals that are guilty who are being set free back into our communities.…

    • 617 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Jury selection is laid down in the Juries Act 1994. While it is proven that there are reasonable alternatives to a jury trial and that there is no doubt that jury trial is both time consuming and expensive when compared with trial by magistrates or by a judge alone, however the right to a jury trial shall not be dismissed so lightly. The anti jury lobby deems the jury system unpopular the importance of which is considered only overrated. I will be critically analysing whether trial by jury should be abolished in the UK legal system plus evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of the system.…

    • 2051 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays

Related Topics