Jury system of United States - Essay Example

Jury System of United s To know what is right and what is wrong in the world of criminals; jury system has been developed. The objective of jury system is to provide the feeling of guilt and innocence to the accused people what they actually deserve. In other words it's a system that investigate the crime and its main major roots. People serving in jury system not only inspect the crime but also saves the citizen from these speculative criminals. They inspect and investigate crime not as jury server or inspectors but disguising in as a casual citizen. So jury servers may also know as protectors of citizens. As in the book "On the Grand Jury", the indication taken from "United States v. Calandra in 1974" that Supreme Court says about the jury system that its purpose is not only to investigate possible criminal conduct but also to act as a "protector of citizen against arbitrary and oppressive government action" and to perform this action jury "deliberates in secret and may determine alone the course of its inquiry". Though this is very much true that without thorough investigation the jury server are not intent to ensnare the crime with deserving prosecution or claiming them for their deeds or warranting the prosecutors for being innocent. Jurors are authorize to dismiss any person in the government incase if not serving the country sincerely. It's their duty to listen the person who is accused by the prosecutors and the person selected to be the government employee or brought in the country is secure from any inducement. Jurors are the first protectors of citizens and for the people who are accused by the law unconstitutionally. In an article by James W. Gilchrist, Jr. quoted the idea of juries in Virginia Colony is, "When the case was given to the jury, it was locked up without food or water until it reached a verdict. A juryman could not leave his fellows until a verdict was reached, which, as one writer noted, made prolonged disagreement practically unknown." Qs. How did the jury concept originate with the Magna Carta Ans. Mangna Carta is a significant historical process that led to the constitutional law today. The concept of common law and trial by jury originated in England with the Anglo-Saxons. In 1215, with the signing of the Magna Carta, nobles and freemen of England were accorded trial by a jury of peers. When the several jurisdictions to pass local Imperial Acts legislation came to consider which statutes to include as part of the received Imperial statute law of the jurisdiction, they all included Magna Carta. As several of these statutes are relatively recent, and all of them the product of 20th century consideration, they represent a judgment by law-makers that the linkage with Magna Carta should be maintained in contemporary law, even if only for sentimental rather than practical reasons. In the cases of Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, the Australian Capital Territory and New Zealand, many of the problems of identifying the relevant chapters of Magna Carta that apply have been solved by local Imperial Acts legislation. In all cases the legislature has not only indicated which version of Magna Carta applies that enactment is part of the statute law of the jurisdiction. Nevertheless, there are some minor differences between these jurisdictions to be noticed, especially in the case of the Australian Capital Territory, where the relevant text of the 1297 statute includes the preamble. In New Zealand, while schedule1 of the Imperial Laws Application Act 1988 (NZ) only refers to chapter 29 of the statute of 1297, the version reprinted for reference in the Reprinted Statutes of New Zealand includes the preamble to Magna Carta 1297. It follows from such legislation that no other chapters in the version of 1297, and none of the provisions of any of the earlier versions of Magna Carta, are part of the law of the jurisdictions in which Imperial Acts legislation is in force. This has not, however, prevented consideration of the legal origins of ancient offices and show that the Charter denied to a sheriff the power to hold Pleas of the Crown, namely, a power to decide legal cases as a judicial officer. Qs. What was the original purpose of a jury established in the Magna Carta Ans. The original purpose of a jury establishment in the Magna Carta was when the Magna Carta was wrested from King John; among the things, which it granted, was a trial by a jury of one's peers. The purpose of this provision was to take from the king and from the nobles the power to send a subject to prison for asserting the rights of the common man against the man of privilege. While the origin of trial by jury seems to be historically hazy, it is a certainty that it came to be most thoroughly established by the Magna Carta; and at that time trial by jury was, fundamentally, in a purer and better form than it has been at any time since. The obvious implications of that great instrument were that the jury was to judge independently and fearlessly everything involved in the charge, and especially its intrinsic justice, and give its decision thereupon; and this meant that the jury was to judge the law as well as the fact. Within a century of the time of the promulgation of that great instrument, its provisions had been so altered that courts were beginning to take away from juries the power to determine the justice of the laws. George Washington, the first president of United States in 1788 said." There was not a member of the Constitutional Convention who had the least objection to what is contended for by the advocates for a Bill of Rights and trial by jury." Qs. Who are persons that serves on a jury Ans. A person that serves on a jury is known as Jurors. Jury service is important for the citizens so people chosen for this committee should be intelligent, clever, nice listeners and hard working. They are ordinary people selected in the court by senior judges and jurors. A juror must have a crime clean history and a proof from the employer that one is hard working. If the person won't in a case being selected for juror his name stays in juror's list for later, as selection of only 16 - 23 people is being done randomly from list of jurors. Justice Ward Hunt, in 1873, admires the jurors in his words" "Twelve jurors know more of the common affairs of life than does one man, and they can draw wiser and safer conclusions than a single judge" Qs. Where do jury members come from Ans. A registration is being done on a jury specific website by signing in the website and telling them the interests and what influence made one register. Person is supposed to answer few of generic national, political and criminal questions. Moreover, one should bring a working certificate from his employer showing that the person is strong. Daniel Webster, American Statesman and orator in 1848 mentioned that "The protection of life and property, habeas corpus, trial by jury, the right of an open trial, these are principles of public liberty existing in the best form in the republican institutions of this country." Qs. What function does the jury serve in the American judicial process Ans. Jury service serves as an independent body to courts and prosecutors defending the citizens who are accused for something they don't deserve. In judiciary process, they investigate the crime in a team deeply to defense the prosecutor. Moreover, in federal courts jury is the formal process bringing formal charges. They use both, investigation and charging body. According to Justice Hugo Black in 1939, 1943, "Our duty to preserve the Seventh Amendment is a matter of high Constitutional importance. The founders of our country thought that trial by civil jury was an essential bulwark of civil liberty and it must be scrupulously safeguarded." Qs. What are the qualifications to be a jury member in your state Ans. As such in our state there is no jury concept but equivalent to those are spy inspectors and other attorneys. For them as well the qualification must be specialization in law is required. However if talking about jurors; A juror must be an adult i.e., his age must be over 18. He should be a citizen of that state yet a resident of the same city or town where he want to serve. Qualification must be enough to vote for good in his country is more than enough to be a juror. He should know well to read and write; moreover is a cool minded, soft-spoken and has all the qualities of moralize character man. A juror must not have a criminal background as in his own past history, neither he had served from last three months during proceedings in the district court and nor he is ever claimed for bribing, theft or any other felony. Qs. What are some of the exemptions from jury service Ans. A juror may be exempt if he gets over 70 years of age. Service exemptions may also be made in case that juror has a child or any of his children less than 10 years of age and need his full attention and there is no other person to look after them. As every country wants their citizens to be fully educated, they prefer the students of private schools, colleges or even universities to complete their studies with full concentration; and though these students are also let off. Employees of legislative government offices, senate, and house representatives are also hooked off. People who owe the responsibility of an adult or a child who cannot take care of one. People with mental distraction and retardation cannot be part of jury. The jury exempt the juror at time when he is suppose to visit court on some religious holiday and he can't make it; he has to make appropriate excuses from judges before time. Jurors are not allowed to make economical reasons for the day off however judges listen to personal problems cause of jury services and allow the juror to take off but to compensate that day afterwards some other day. Judge Stephen Reinhard, Nineth Circuit Court of Appeals mentioned in 1986, "Our constitutional right to trial by jury does not turn on the political mood of the moment, the outcome of cost/benefit analyses or the results of economic or fiscal calculations. There is no price tag on the continued existence of the civil jury system, or any other constitutionally-provided right." Qs. What are common grounds for challenging prospective jury members Ans. An opinion in the mind of a prospective juror, in the trial of a civil action, concerning one of several issues involved in the action, is not tantamount to an opinion as to who should prevail in the action, or an opinion in the trial of a criminal action as to the guilt or innocence of a defendant charged with a crime, and the fact that one or several prospective jurors may have such an opinion does not necessarily disqualify them. Qs. What are restrictions placed on counsel when using peremptory challenges Ans. Jurors are restricted parties from striking on basis of criteria that the court had been unable to ensure compliance with the mandate for the variety of reasons. They are restricted when the justice system depends in large part on society ability to check the nearly unfettered prosecutorial discretion that already exists. Qs. What are important issues regarding jury verdicts Ans. The most important issue regarding jury verdicts as they establish both law and facts together while making any decision for any particular case. John Adams says that, "It is not only his right, but his duty... to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court." In a Yale Law journal clearly quoted in the book "You the juror!!!" Moreover if jury disagree with the decision against an innocent person claiming one as the victim, jurors have the right to change the decision by showing up the investigated proofs and courts has to abide it. Qs. What Supreme Court cases relate to juries Ans. The every case of Supreme Court relate to jury, which has a doubt to victimize an innocent. Jurors listen to the case, and the witnesses very carefully and ask the judge to stop prosecution where he feels of wrong deed might be done or case must be investigated. They allow the judges to sentence only when they are contended. Qs. What is the constitutional support for the jury system Ans. The jury system acts as an independent body. Though, for each state lies with their different rules and regulations for the state. Moreover they can take the decision over the constitution where judges are supposed to abide them. They listen to the honest victim to deep investigate the case. Qs. How do juries function in other countries Ans. Juries are there in the country or state in a team of 12- 16 people. They are bold and intelligent enough to fulfill their duties. The function of the jury in the American judicial system is to attend the trial and deliberate on the evidence in order to provide a unanimous verdict. The point of a jury system is that it is supposed to provide a fair and unbiased examination of the evidence; taking away the power of the judge who may be prejudicial in his decision. In addition, many view the use of jury as an important defense against unchecked power in the hands of the state. When the state controls the delivery and judgment of evidence the possibility for abuse increase exponentially. Because the jury has such power, a key component of the system is for lawyers to try to find jurors whom they believe will be likely to believe their side. In other words, the functionalities they are assigned by, includes, the major of all is to secure the innocent people for being victimized for a crime they never ought to make. Its part of their duty to raise the self-confidence of the innocent people that they shouldn't feel guilty especially for what they haven't done. And though this confidence is given by making them trust the juries that they will investigate the claim so deeply that they'll make them secure from sentence. They are powerful to keep all arms that may use to defense them selves while searching the true facts. They fight against the government and other non-critic people to have complete and full rights f the people who deserves. They keep a narrow eye on the judicial decisions as if they are not enticement and may review the case in bad contents. They are independent and can sentence against judge in such cases. Qs. How can the present jury system be improved in your state Ans. Jury system can be flourished if time spent on juror selection arises. Johnson and Haney that jury selection takes almost 5hours are observing it; the judge spends 1.5 minute, prosecutor spends 2.5 minutes and defense spends 4 minutes on each juror. The judge and attorneys almost talk 61% of time. Thus this concludes that juror should need time while he is selected. A questionnaire that asks juror for his background thoroughly and his personal other information should be maintained which saves juror time of talk before the case starts; as half of the time juror spends in his introduction to the court. Juror should have a nice vocabulary or the selection criteria makes them more attested as it has been notice that while being in the court jurors are unaware of many typical law vocabulary i.e., many of them hardly knows the difference between fair and impartial. Juror must be bias; not only innocent face people are innocent but sometimes they need to be searched and decide that crime is crime whether it's a bank robbery or a jewels theft. Juror should trust on his investigation and show up confidently with the evidence. Qs. What is the future of the jury system Ans. Issue at the forefront of the jury system in America is the idea of jury unanimity. Many high-profile trials that ended in hung juries were discovered to have been nearly unanimous with only one or two holdouts. Subsequently there have been some efforts made to follow England's move toward allowing non-unanimous verdicts. At present this concept has had no real legislative pressure behind it and typically only becomes an issue when it has been discovered that a defendant generally found guilty in the public's eye receives the benefit of a hung jury. The American trial by jury system has been in place since the country's inception and its precursors date back for centuries. Whatever flaws one may find in it, and surely it is not a perfect system, the alternative seems far worse. Most Americans would not be willing to give up the system as it is, though certainly everyone probably has their own idea on how to better it. Despite not being perfect, clearly no one American is ready to give serious thought to dumping it and starting over from scratch. Qs. What are your personal feelings or experiences with juries Ans. Personally I assume that this jury system is a perfect independent system that has rights to secure the above suspicion victims and provide a guard wall to the citizens of the states. But besides I think they should still in hierarchy lay down to the judges of the Supreme Court and they have the courage to prove themselves and defense in front of these judges against the attorneys. References The Holy Smoke (tcsmpsi, April 28, 2000). Jury System. Fully Informed Jury Association (Helena, MT 59604-5570, April 30, 2007). On the Grand Jury. 3Info2U.com (n.d, n.d.). Magna Carta. Citizens for Better Government (Gainesville, Fla, August 08, 2002). You the Juror: The only power the judge has over the jury in their ignorance. Texas Court Online (n.d., December 21, 2006). Exemptions from Jury Service. Ministry of Justice (Tah o te Ture, n.d.). Information of Jurors in New Zealand. (Beth Bochnak, n.d.) Why you need to fight for improved voir dire conditions Public Law Research Institute (Ellen Chilton & Patiricia Henley, n.d.). Improving the Jury system Melbourne University Law Review (David Clark, n.d.). The Icon of Liberty: The Status and Role of Magna Carta in Australian and New Zealand Law Canada Legal Information Sources (Dilraj S. Gosal, n.d.). The Purpose and Origin of the Grand Jury in the USA South Carolina Trials Lawyer Bulletin (James W. Gilchrist Jr., 1988) Our Precious Jury System: Its passed the Test Of Time. About Ajj (Carol Leonning, 2004) A Life Time Of Faith in the Law. Defence of Trial By Jury. Vol 1. Read More