Codified in the US Constitution, the judicial system in America has been called the best of a bad lot around the world. It brings normal people, people who may have never had any interactions with the law before, into the judicial system. An American Jury System Review would go into some of the good things and some of the bad things about it.
The way the judicial system is supposed to work could read like a popular novel. A defendant, charged with a crime, is brought before a judge. They have an attorney. The State has an attorney or prosecutor that attempts to prove the defendant is guilty. The persons lawyer attempts to show that the prosecutor has not proven that and that his client is, indeed, not guilty.
The jury, while all of this is going on, must ignore all of their feelings about the defendant. They listen to all of the facts presented, attempting to get through all of the talk and double talk while still keeping track of everything. They are supposed to use all of this talk to make their decision about guilt
Some people, when sitting on a jury, get intimidated with all of the pomp and ceremony. They will occasionally identify with the defendant and temper their decision about guilt based on that. Since the judicial system is supposed to be blind to race, wealth and or position, this is a dangerous way to decide the verdict.
The way to get on a jury is pretty straight forward, as well. Once or twice a month, or more often if need be, a letter or post card is sent to many people asking them to come to the court house and contend for a seat. A large group of people will already be there and all of them will be working on a survey or questionnaire. This form will have many questions asking about your feeling on a multitude of feeling and prejudices.
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.
The judge will talk with this group and ask them a few general questions and then turn the questioning over to the lawyers. These professionals will attempt to find out how the jurists, individually, feel about the accused. The prosecution wants to know if each person knows any of the people in the room. They might want to know how each person feels about the death penalty. They will try to illicit their feelings about race, especially if the defendant is a different race than the person being asked.
Several high profile cases, across the country, since 1996, have made a mockery of some of the high value everyone places in this system. This is because you are not supposed to have any preconceived thoughts about the person being tried. There is a growing number of activists who believe in jury nullification which means that no matter what is brought up, in the trial, they are going to decide based on some quota they support.
The way the judicial system is supposed to work could read like a popular novel. A defendant, charged with a crime, is brought before a judge. They have an attorney. The State has an attorney or prosecutor that attempts to prove the defendant is guilty. The persons lawyer attempts to show that the prosecutor has not proven that and that his client is, indeed, not guilty.
The jury, while all of this is going on, must ignore all of their feelings about the defendant. They listen to all of the facts presented, attempting to get through all of the talk and double talk while still keeping track of everything. They are supposed to use all of this talk to make their decision about guilt
Some people, when sitting on a jury, get intimidated with all of the pomp and ceremony. They will occasionally identify with the defendant and temper their decision about guilt based on that. Since the judicial system is supposed to be blind to race, wealth and or position, this is a dangerous way to decide the verdict.
The way to get on a jury is pretty straight forward, as well. Once or twice a month, or more often if need be, a letter or post card is sent to many people asking them to come to the court house and contend for a seat. A large group of people will already be there and all of them will be working on a survey or questionnaire. This form will have many questions asking about your feeling on a multitude of feeling and prejudices.
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.
The judge will talk with this group and ask them a few general questions and then turn the questioning over to the lawyers. These professionals will attempt to find out how the jurists, individually, feel about the accused. The prosecution wants to know if each person knows any of the people in the room. They might want to know how each person feels about the death penalty. They will try to illicit their feelings about race, especially if the defendant is a different race than the person being asked.
Several high profile cases, across the country, since 1996, have made a mockery of some of the high value everyone places in this system. This is because you are not supposed to have any preconceived thoughts about the person being tried. There is a growing number of activists who believe in jury nullification which means that no matter what is brought up, in the trial, they are going to decide based on some quota they support.
About the Author:
The American jury system review is carried out by people who seek justice. Read the book today by ordering it through here http://tunno.com.
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire