There are
pros and cons to the English system of jury trials. The original English system of jury trials
dates back to King Henry II, who had twelve lawful and free men hear a case and issue a verdict.
These juries acted on previous knowledge that they had.
Eventually, this
system was replaced by one in which the jurors heard the case at the trial. There are advantages
and disadvantages to this system. One advantage is that it ensures that people who are peers to
the person charged with a crime will hear the case. As juries have become more diverse, this
means a more representative portion of the community will serve on the jury. Another advantage
of jury trials is that community members determine a persons guilt or innocence. This means that
the government cannot abuse its powers when prosecuting. Since both the prosecution and the
defense usually screen jurors, it reduces the likelihood of jury bias. It also means that people
who serve on juries tend to become more aware of the legal process in the country in which they
live.
A disadvantage of the jury system is that it may be hard to find
impartial jurors. There are times when cases are so widely publicized that it becomes hard to
find people who have not already formed an opinion on the case. Additionally, a jury that is
representative of the community, may, by nature, have its own biases. People from a specific
group may be more sympathetic to a defendant who is from that group. It is difficult to
determine what a good mix of jurors really should be. Finally, sometimes a jury may be asked to
rule on a case that is outside of their experience.
No comments:
Post a Comment