LAW
What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the jury system?
Facts should be decided by ordinary people as is the aim of the jury system, but jury selection cannot ever be perfect and biases continue to affect outcomes in various cases.
Rational, grounded jurors can cut to the chase, reach an equitable verdict, and send the parties home by suppertime.
Many jurors are not rational and grounded.
The Framers clearly thought highly of it (see 7th Amendment; also 4th Am., where the presence of the word "unreasonable" signals the presence of jury issue to the late-18-th-century Anglo-American legal mind). Their judgment is entitled to respect.
In criminal cases, I think the fact that the state may (subject to plea-bargaining) be forced to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury is a major protector of our rights.
In civil cases, the benefits of the jury system may have waned over the decades. Juries are as good at deciding straightforward tort and contract disputes as they ever were, but increasingly they are being asked to weigh in on issues where expert bureaucrats have already weighed in via regulations. That doesn't make sense. Either get juries out of those issues -- or else, get rid of the bureaucrats. But I don't see the latter happening, so....
Like democracy, the only things worse than the jury system is every other system.
I'm in family law now- no juries apply.
The strength of the jury system is that it brings together members of a community to collectively determine rights, duties, obligations, punishments that will apply to that community, guided by legal principles, common sense, human experience. The weakness of the jury system is that, due to unwillingness to serve or inability, the actual makeup of a jury is frequently non-representative of their community, which can affect the outcome of a case.
the jury system comes with many strengths and weaknesses.
for once, they are people of normal backgrounds, unaware of the law, and most of the legal system by it self, however, on the other hand, they are of common people, and of normal mentality, provided for which they have the thinking of that of a reasonable man, which is different from that of a judge, so the sentence or verdict from jury will be different and mostly, effective on the part of defendant,
In an advanced society jury trial is a guarantee of justice, while in the third world is a utopia.
The jury system is anachronistic and is relevant to a time when defendants' rights were non-existent and judicial and prosecutorial excesses needed to be kept in check. There are some cases, eg complex frauds, where the evidence is beyond the ken of many ordinary jurors who, in a trial lasting several months, fail to grasp the essential facts and understand their relationship to the charges brought. The result has been a number of exceptionally expensive trials ending up with juries being discharged, at vast expense to the public purse. Other problems with juries is their use of the Internet to research cases, when their remit is to determine each case solely on the evidence given in court. In the modern age of the Internet and Twitter, the ability for judges to control this increasingly worrying phenomenon is limited.
The other main disadvantage of the jury system is that jurors are unable to give reasons for their decision, which is something that every defendant should be entitled to hear.
With the good quality of present-day judges and their ability to deal with both law and fact, there is no logical reason why juries should not be dispensed with. In Magistrates Courts, there are few who criticise the fairness of proceedings before the District Judges sitting there, trying cases without juries. If we trust District Judges, with this task, why do we have less confidence in the ability of Crown Court judges to do the same?   | | |
I would not be able to answer as Switzerland does not know a jury system.
It is a fantastic system. jurors are rarely fooled and they can usually tell very easily when someone is lying.
Its biggest drawback is it is very expensive to get through the process.
A jury made up of 12 unbiased citizens from all walks of life and backgrounds who are brought together for a single purpose is the smallest, most local, and only incorruptible form of government we have. The foundation of our system of justice is based on empowering those citizens to listen to the evidence and reach a decision based on the facts and the law in an open, public forum. We must cherish and protect the jury system.
Again I am not a criminal expert however the clear strengths are that evidence can be assessed objectively as they are selected at random and come from a range of backgrounds (although some may also see this as a weakness).
The weakness is that they are not legally trainined therefore factors other than the evidence may influence their decision.
The strengths of the jury system include the best system for fair justice in the world...being judged by your peers. Often justice can only be served by those that know what it is like to be in the litigants shoes. However, on the downside, the jury often contains the lowest common denominator in society. They are often not the most intelligent group and can usually be easily swayed by a good presentation, which means the quality of your lawyer gets justice. This turns our system into a system where justice can only be purchased. If you add a system where judges are elected and you have a recipe for fallacy. If you are savvy as a lawyer, you want a jury. If you are bland and want to pursue the facts, which can be complicated, you want a judge.
The jury system is a tried and tested system of law. The jury should be independent of the accused and the judiciary so are able to give an objective decision in a court of law.
Unfortunately some individuals in a jury do not realise that they must obey the system and not to contact the accused, not to look up similar cases on the internet or info on the accused. This places the trial in jeopardy and a retrial is the only way round it thus wasting a great deal of money. |
| 1 |
<< PREVIOUS NEXT >>
| |
|
99692 interviews created
INVITE YOUR FRIENDS