Under the Sixth Amendment. The Sixth Amendment guarantees a criminal defendant the right to impartial jury. The jury will consider the evidence against the defendant and decide whether to find him or her guilty of the crime. Twelve jurors must agree in order to find a defendant guilty or not guilty. If the jury fails to reach a unanimous verdict and finds itself at a standstill, the judge may declare a mistrial. Then the case may be dismissed or the trial may start all over again (LC).
The origins of the jury system are from the 11th-century England. The concept was that people were entitled to a jury of their peers. At the time, a peer meant someone who knew the accused, someone who lived in the neighborhood and knew who was a liar and who
Throughout history the United States Supreme Court has upheld laws and even struck them down when it came to the constitutionality of a law. In the case of Strickland v Washington, the Supreme Court upheld the Sixth Amendment and said that the right to counsel means the right to competent counsel and if the attorney is not competent than the result of the trial is invalid. In the cases, starting with Powell vs. Alabama (1932), Johnson vs. Zerbst (1938), and Gideon vs. Wainwright (1963) the Supreme Court has recognized the sixth amendment right to counsel does exists. They stated that it is important for the criminal to have right to counsel to ensure that their fundament right to a fair trial is upheld.
People believed that god’s judgement decided whether you were guilty or not. Trial by combat would also be used in the middle ages. This wasn’t very fair because someone could accuse a person with a disadvantage who would obviously lose. This would cause many thefts. “Henry offered a fairer, more logical type of trial: trial by jury.”
The jury system originated in England hundreds of years ago. The colonists brought the jury system from England to the United States. In 1733, John Zenger, a printer, printed a newspaper critical for the British Government. His attorney convinced the jury to be in favor for Zenger because his criticisms were true. After this trial, it gave ordinary citizens the freedom of speech and the power to go against the king.
Our rejection of simple-majority jury decisions, I believe, was deeply-rooted. In the 1700’s, Sir William Blackstone made his opinion clear that a jury trial was the most “transcendent privilege” any person can hope for. 3 Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England 379 (1768). That no state can take away your property or liberty without the “unanimous consent of twelve of his neighbors and equals,” was a great comfort to Blackstone, as it should be to all of us. Id. John Adams believed that a unanimous jury is the thing that “preserves the rights of mankind.”
Another reason citizens question juries is that they have bias from personal experience or the media. The defendant and the prosecution criticize the jury system because the actual jurors may not understand the situation from any point of view because they come from different lifestyles (Doc E). The American jury system is not a good idea anymore because juries are not experts in law, they have bias, and are not “a jury of peers”. Because jurors are not experts in law, they are subject to be
Regardless of what is fair and what is not, the defendant has rights during trial. One of those rights under the 5th Amendment is the right against self incrimination and according to Winegar, the 6th Amendment provides a defendant the ability to testify on one’s behalf (2013). However, lack of testimony from a defendant can cause an interference with the jury or cloud their judgement because they were not previewed to what the defendant has to say. According to Hall, the jury is instructed not to guess or assume guilt because the defendant does not put on a defense.
Due to the race of Dwight Dexter, it is believed that the jury could have had a bias against him. The jury is to be made up of all races, the prosecution cannot strike one because of their race, proven in Bataan v. Kentucky. Finally, the Sixth Amendment says that the accused must have adequate council. Dwight Dexter was provided with unorganized and unprepared council. Throughout the trials, his council proved to be inadequate.
Citizen Required To Serve? Jury a group of citizens sworn to give a verdict in a legal case on the basis of evidence submitted to them in court. Being able to serve on a jury is an absolute privilege to do for some and one thing that makes this country very different and unique from others. Serving on a jury should not be required for citizens. Some people believe serving on a jury should be a requirement for every citizen.
The jury comprises twelve Athenian citizens, chosen by lot, who hear the evidence and make the final decision. Athens states, "Yet, since this matter came to me for settlement, then shall my city take you in, as someone as yet free of guilt, and I shall set in place a solemn court of judges sworn to deal with homicide, from this day forth until the end of time (480-481). " This system of trial by jury was a significant development in Athenian democracy and reflected a growing belief in the importance of popular sovereignty and civic participation. By participating in the trial, the jurors were taking an active role in the administration of justice and helping to shape the laws and customs of their community. This sense of civic engagement was central to Athenian democracy, which emphasized the importance of active participation in public affairs.
Trials shouldn’t be done in secret way from public eyes because how can you call that fair. Libertyfirstfl.org states that the 6th amendment has multiple clauses within it. Speedy Trial Clause, Public Trial Clause, Right to a Jury Trial Clause, Confrontation Clause, Arraignment Clause, Compulsory Process Clause, and Right to Counsel Clause. Right to jury is crucial to having a fair and just trial. It picks random citizens to sit in a trial, they don’t choose people that might know the defendant.
In the play 12 Angry Men, a murder case is being reviewed by a jury. This jury must decide if a kid who killed his father is guilty or not. Two jurors that were on opposing sides for most of the play was Juror Eight and Juror Three. The reason they were on opposing sides was because Juror Three believed the kid was guilty, while Juror Eight believed there was not enough evidence to convict him. Most of the jurors wanted to settle on having reasonable doubt, so another jury could be called in.
An agreement from the jury is a unanimous decision between all 12 jurors. The jury consists of everyday citizens given the responsibility of deciding the innocence or guilt of an accused person. Jurors should decide the fate of the accused because it is a peaceful method to resolve the problem, a unique constitutional right not many people in the world get to enjoy , and it gives everyday citizens a chance to participate in the government and represent the voice of the people. First of all using a jury provides a peaceful method to resolve issues. A jury represents everyday people who all have different viewpoints on different things.
Articles published by Strodtbeck and his social science colleagues focused primarily on social process in jury deliberations, jurors' status characteristics and levels of participation, and coalition formation in the jury. For better or worse, as Selznick noted, the theoretical context into which the experimental jury studies were cast was "small groups." The insights and theoretical perspectives of that sociological subfield became the major paradigm for analyzing the American jury. Strodtbeck did not find a legal writing partner, the consequences of which were that most of the substantive data about how jurors evaluate testimony, respond to expert witnesses, understand and follow legal instructions, and place more or less emphasis on various aspects of the trial have never been reported for civil juries. In The Jury and the Defense of Insanity, Simon adapted the Strodtbeck design, which involved having real jurors serve as subjects, listen to audiotaped trials, and deliberate until they reached a verdict, and reported juries' responses to criminal trials in which defendants introduced a plea of insanity [ R.J. Simon, The Jury and The Defense Insanity.
12 Angry Men:-Psychological Behaviour Analysis Signs Of attributions There were many examples of attribution errors and biases in the movie. For example (an actor observer bias) the kid (Victim) is known to have yelled "I'm going to kill you" on the night of the murder. Cobb says no one would threaten to kill anyone unless he mean it (internal attribution)(0:46:25)&(0:46:45) .But after some time Fonda involves cobb into some argument and indirectly makes him yell "I'll kill you".
This essay will briefly discuss the role of the jury and how it works, from the principle behind it, to the method with which members are selected, and to the powers available to jurors. Moreover, it will outline advantages and disadvantages of trial by jury, and it will point out a couple of ways which could ameliorate this type of trial. Trial by jury has been a part of the criminal justice system since the 12th century (Davies, 2015), it is considered an ancient right and a symbol of liberty (Hostettler, 2004). It creates no precedent and it can decide challenging cases equitably without making bad law, it also brings members of the public into the administration of justice and into an understanding of legal and human rights (Hostettler,