As part of the Constitution, a jury, made up of twelve peers and two alternates, acts as an important part of the U. S. Justice system. Most believe the system has failed, and that it is time for American Trial Jury Reform. A belief that has broadened most recently in relation to enforcing hate crimes, and other acts of aggression between one or more persons. Crimes that also include several bullying incidents in which few penalties have been placed on offenders.
Originally, the system became part of the Constitution because the Founding Fathers did not trust judges. Since, it has been a never ending battle between judges and those serving as to whom has the right to hand down a decision as to whether the defendant is found guilty, or innocent. The practice of believing an individual innocent until proven guilty is also one which has been lost somewhere along the way, though in reality remains law.
While less likely when it comes to jurors, judges whom have seen evidence prior to the trial, often have preconceived notions about the defendant, if only on a subconscious level. As such, one aspect of reform works to correct this issue so that if a judge has previous knowledge, the information is then also presented to the jury prior to the beginning of the trial.
Criminal cases can often move ahead to a hearing faster than lawyers can keep up at times. Having a case heard in a hearing versus a jury trial can be a dangerous ordeal, especially if the individual is innocent. For, while evidence can be presented to a jury in a court of law, no circumstantial, or criminal evidence is generally allowed in a hearing.
Even when there is a trial, judges often attempt to intimidate jurors to follow specific instructions, instructions set forth by the judge. In reality, these instructions are only advisory though the judge can prosecute any attorney for contempt if they even try to inform the juror of the jury's right to decide the law based on anything other than the facts of a case.
As all cases involve legal issues and matters which are private in nature, it is essential that there are also guidelines set related to the distribution of such knowledge. Generally, the instructions would be the same as in a court of law in which the jurors are commanded to not talk, or write about the case for a specified amount of time once a verdict is handed down in the case.
At which point, each trial becomes a learning experience not only for the attorneys, plaintiffs and defendant, but all those involved. If a judge desires to hear legal arguments in order to make a decision on any motions which may have been presented, then the jury needs to hear those same arguments to decide the verdict. The jury should also be given all copies of Cds, transcripts or other items presented as evidence during the trial.
When it comes to reform, it can often take a long time to incorporate laws into action. As the world has seen, there are even those in law enforcement who can not be trusted. Something that has also been proven to the be case with at least one prison guard at the Montford Unit in Lubbock. Seems rather than learn how to care for the disabled inmate, it was easier to kill the sixth three year old man. Hopefully, if reform takes place, these and other issues will be incorporated with tough sentences for those behaving in such fashion, especially those with disabilities whom are no doubt much weaker than the guards who handle them.
Originally, the system became part of the Constitution because the Founding Fathers did not trust judges. Since, it has been a never ending battle between judges and those serving as to whom has the right to hand down a decision as to whether the defendant is found guilty, or innocent. The practice of believing an individual innocent until proven guilty is also one which has been lost somewhere along the way, though in reality remains law.
While less likely when it comes to jurors, judges whom have seen evidence prior to the trial, often have preconceived notions about the defendant, if only on a subconscious level. As such, one aspect of reform works to correct this issue so that if a judge has previous knowledge, the information is then also presented to the jury prior to the beginning of the trial.
Criminal cases can often move ahead to a hearing faster than lawyers can keep up at times. Having a case heard in a hearing versus a jury trial can be a dangerous ordeal, especially if the individual is innocent. For, while evidence can be presented to a jury in a court of law, no circumstantial, or criminal evidence is generally allowed in a hearing.
Even when there is a trial, judges often attempt to intimidate jurors to follow specific instructions, instructions set forth by the judge. In reality, these instructions are only advisory though the judge can prosecute any attorney for contempt if they even try to inform the juror of the jury's right to decide the law based on anything other than the facts of a case.
As all cases involve legal issues and matters which are private in nature, it is essential that there are also guidelines set related to the distribution of such knowledge. Generally, the instructions would be the same as in a court of law in which the jurors are commanded to not talk, or write about the case for a specified amount of time once a verdict is handed down in the case.
At which point, each trial becomes a learning experience not only for the attorneys, plaintiffs and defendant, but all those involved. If a judge desires to hear legal arguments in order to make a decision on any motions which may have been presented, then the jury needs to hear those same arguments to decide the verdict. The jury should also be given all copies of Cds, transcripts or other items presented as evidence during the trial.
When it comes to reform, it can often take a long time to incorporate laws into action. As the world has seen, there are even those in law enforcement who can not be trusted. Something that has also been proven to the be case with at least one prison guard at the Montford Unit in Lubbock. Seems rather than learn how to care for the disabled inmate, it was easier to kill the sixth three year old man. Hopefully, if reform takes place, these and other issues will be incorporated with tough sentences for those behaving in such fashion, especially those with disabilities whom are no doubt much weaker than the guards who handle them.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire