The Reasons of Criticism for the Jury Trials

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
References

Introduction

A jury is a group of legal experts who assess the evidence and give a verdict in a court of law. There are usually twelve of them in the court. Although the jury gives its findings, judgment is made by the judge. Hence, the role of the jury is to determine whether the defendant is guilty or not, but the final decision is made by the judge. This form of trial is mainly used in serious criminal cases. Although jury trials have been claimed to be non-biased applying common values, they have come under criticism for several reasons.

Discussion

The first aspect of a jury trial that has been criticized is the law on jury secrecy. This law dictates that the jurys reason for making their decision remains a secret and no inquiries can be made. As a result, innocent people have been sentenced to death because of such decisions (Burns, 2009). Why are people deprived of the right to life, freedom, or property without being told the reasons the decision has been taken? In contrast, decisions by judges are normally examined, facts and reasons are always given on the decisions made.

Another reason why I disagree with a jury trial is that jurors may convict based on personal feelings rather than on objective evidence. They may feel hurt or anger out of personal reasons, like in emotional cases (Neubauer and Fradella, 2011). For example, in cases of child rape, a death sentence may be given out of pity for the child. In other cases, some members of the jury who are parents may sympathize with the child picturing that the child was theirs and hence give an unfair verdict (Burnett, 2003). The limited role of the judge trials to abide by the jurors ruling only seems to make the system more unfair.

Jurors may be influenced by prejudice, including racial or ethnic discrimination, especially in cases where all jurors belong to a particular race or ethnic group. An example is the 1992 Rodney King case in California, in which white officers were acquitted despite incriminating videotape evidence for their use of too much force in the cruel beating of black. The jury in this case consisted of whites. It turns out that jurors may give a sympathetic and fairer verdict to a party based on political, racial, or ethnic affiliations. The white police officers were favored and consequently acquitted and this amounted to an unfair trial by the jury.

Some jurors have been known to give a death sentence to attract media and the public to be seen as competent. They may also give a quick death sentence without detailed deliberations to get through with the case.

Conclusion

Many innocent people are in prison serving death sentences due to poor verdicts by jurors. The law on jury secrecy convicts innocent rather than make reasonable inquiries into how the verdict was obtained which is a major weakness of the system. Moreover, some juries are known to contain a significant proportion of persons belonging to a particular race and this can lead to biased verdicts or discrimination. Finally, jurors sometimes deliver verdicts based on personal feelings while some lack the skills and experience required to deliver death sentences.

References

Burnett, D. G. (2003).A Trial by Jury.New York:Vintage.

Burns, R. (2009). The Death of the American Trial. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Neubauer, D.W., and Fradella, H. F. (2011).AmericasCourts and the Criminal JusticeSystem, 10^th Ed. Connecticut: Wadsworth.

Click Here To Order Now!

The Reasons of Criticism for the Jury Trials

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)