History of Jury Trial and Jury Size - Essay Example

Rights are given to the accused person on the sixth amendment: (1.) The speedy trial, in which justice must be given to an accused person as early as possible. (2.) Public Trial, in which friends and relatives of accuser are allowed to attend him. (3.) Evaluate by Impartial Jury in which jury decided without any outside force. (4.) The defendant must acknowledge any accusation with notice that someone has tagged him. (5.) He or she has guaranteed to find out witnesses who will give clarification against the accused. (6.) The right to have a lawyer. The sixth amendment explains nothing about jury members and size. It only guarantees rights to criminal defendants. (Aschulert, 1994)

Historically, the right to a jury trial of twelve members came from Magna Carta and England colonies. After the sixth amendment, it became part of the Bill Of Rights and the constitution of the US and practiced in civil and criminal cases. It was highly cherished by all. There were two types of juries, the Grand jury, and the Petit jury. This type of justice was legalized by Henry II. He applied Jury Trail first in civil cases and then criminal cases. Petit jury did not hire or employed at that time and not even in the reign of Henry 3 and Henry 4. (Constitution of the US)

In the Eighteenth Century, the Right to Jury Trial of twelve members was approved and became authorized. This right to criminal was written in the constitution of more than ten countries at that time, and also in the Constitution of the US. Before the sixth amendment, the Court hold the point of view that the Jury Trial is obvious right and practiced at all common laws and is comprised of all fundamentals as they were in England. After the mandate of the sixth amendment in the constitution, the Jury Trail integrated with twelve members neither more nor less. (Constitution of the US)

Twelve member Jury Trail decided and guarantees to criminal defendants only to avoid cruel decisions made by Government. It was necessary to protect against baseless criminal charges brought to eliminate enemies. The framers of the constitutions endeavored to create a self-governing judiciary and to provide the right to the accuser of his guilt. There was a small explanation also for having juries of 12 rather than six, that the bigger number of juries significantly improved the range of perspective. The court further explains that juries be supposed to be greater enough to encourage group thought, liberated from external pressure, and to give a just decision that a side view of the society will be a symbol of it. They misunderstood the sixth amendment with Jury size. (Constitution of the US)

In 1979, in William v Florida, Court realized that their decision of twelve members Jury Trail was only a “Historical Accident”. There is not anything about jury size present in the sixth amendment. (Aschulert, 1994)

The Supreme Court took the issue of jury size in William V Florida and declared that 6man juries meet the demands of constitutional requirements. The Court also declared that a small jury does not function like larger juries. Smaller juries have more errors in making important decisions and they cannot overcome the member’s biases as well as they also turn out less correct and inconsistency results. The smaller sized juries do not have a broad vision in producing better judgment. Supreme Court declared that “Jury Size Does Not Matter”. The Court concentrated on the specific analysis that twelve men juries give criminals better benefit as seeing he or she has more opportunity of the jury who will claim for his or her discharge. The Court further stated that it has been proven with few tryouts that especially in a public area that there is no noticeable variation in the results of the two varieties of juries. No theory proposes and no presently proofs that 12-man results are better than a smaller number of members. The Court held the controversial decision on which Ballew said for conserving the matter of Jury Trail there must be the concrete and complete difference between sizes of jury and decision. (Holmquist, 2010)