The jury system, within the United States, is a complex organism that many people do not understand. Those that do can often game the judicial system in various ways. It has been called the very worst system in the world except for all of the other countries. This American Jury System Review will take this into account.
The way the courts work, with juries involved, are relatively straight forward. A charged person comes before the court with their lawyer. A prosecutor, who works for the State or government, who caused the charges to be issued, attempts to prove to the jurists that that person is guilty. The defendants attorney attempts to persuade the jury and the judge that their client is not.
During the trail, the panel listens to both sides and is admonished to listen to the facts of the case. It is the jurist duty, when the lawyers finish their presentations, to decide whether they believe the state or the accused more. It is their job to try to dig through all of the talk and, sometimes, double talk of the lawyers, balanced by what the judge says and does to make sense out of everything.
A horrible trend, in many circles, is the belief that the jurors should be able to take the law and change it to reflect some political purpose. They may so identify with the defendant, or their predicament, that they declare, against better judgment, because of their race, their poverty or membership in some other victim class. This is not a good trend as the weights of justice are held by a lady who is blind to all of these conditions.
Getting on a jury is actually fairly simple. You will get a letter or post card from the county or State court asking you to come and offer yourself as a juror. The lists of these names can come from department of motor vehicles or from the voters registration rolls. You will arrive at a large room with many others, so bring something to read. You will then, usually, be asked to fill out a questionnaire.
The court personnel tasked with getting these people to fill out the questionnaires are attempting to find out what prejudices they have so the lawyers in the case can make informed guesses about them. From time to time, during the day, various numbers of people will be asked to go into an actual court room, populated by a judge, a couple or more lawyers and the accused along with other people looking on.
For the next few minutes, a judge will address these potential jurors and then turn them over to the lawyers present. One from each side of this battle will ask each member of the panel to answer several questions, some of which will be based off of the answers they gave in written form. They will attempt to understand what you feel about the defendant and the crime they are charged with and their race, if this is a factor.
When sitting for a trial, the jury is not supposed to have any preconceived opinions, which, sometimes is hard to do. Many activists want to change this system so that the panel can actually ignore the law in order to bring a better decision, based on some sort of quota. Having normal people decide when other relatively normal people are tried is a system that helps all understand and follow the law better.
The way the courts work, with juries involved, are relatively straight forward. A charged person comes before the court with their lawyer. A prosecutor, who works for the State or government, who caused the charges to be issued, attempts to prove to the jurists that that person is guilty. The defendants attorney attempts to persuade the jury and the judge that their client is not.
During the trail, the panel listens to both sides and is admonished to listen to the facts of the case. It is the jurist duty, when the lawyers finish their presentations, to decide whether they believe the state or the accused more. It is their job to try to dig through all of the talk and, sometimes, double talk of the lawyers, balanced by what the judge says and does to make sense out of everything.
A horrible trend, in many circles, is the belief that the jurors should be able to take the law and change it to reflect some political purpose. They may so identify with the defendant, or their predicament, that they declare, against better judgment, because of their race, their poverty or membership in some other victim class. This is not a good trend as the weights of justice are held by a lady who is blind to all of these conditions.
Getting on a jury is actually fairly simple. You will get a letter or post card from the county or State court asking you to come and offer yourself as a juror. The lists of these names can come from department of motor vehicles or from the voters registration rolls. You will arrive at a large room with many others, so bring something to read. You will then, usually, be asked to fill out a questionnaire.
The court personnel tasked with getting these people to fill out the questionnaires are attempting to find out what prejudices they have so the lawyers in the case can make informed guesses about them. From time to time, during the day, various numbers of people will be asked to go into an actual court room, populated by a judge, a couple or more lawyers and the accused along with other people looking on.
For the next few minutes, a judge will address these potential jurors and then turn them over to the lawyers present. One from each side of this battle will ask each member of the panel to answer several questions, some of which will be based off of the answers they gave in written form. They will attempt to understand what you feel about the defendant and the crime they are charged with and their race, if this is a factor.
When sitting for a trial, the jury is not supposed to have any preconceived opinions, which, sometimes is hard to do. Many activists want to change this system so that the panel can actually ignore the law in order to bring a better decision, based on some sort of quota. Having normal people decide when other relatively normal people are tried is a system that helps all understand and follow the law better.
About the Author:
You can visit tunno.com for more helpful information about An American Jury System Review Would Point Out Bad And Good Points.
No comments:
Post a Comment