Essay On Jury Trial

O.J was a former football star who was very popular and rich. After O.J had a warrant for his arrest put out, DNA samples were taken from him which were soon “allegedly” lost by a dream team member (aboutforensics.com). The dream team was a group of individuals bought by O.J Simpson which included some of the best lawyers out there along with some of his friends for the jury. On October 3, 1995 the dream team announced O.J was not guilty. “We the jury in the above entitled action find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of th crime of murder” (law2.umkc.edu).

Known around the world as O. J., famous celebrity Orenthal James Simpson was arrested and convicted for the murder of his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and her mistress, Ron Lyle Goldman. Although Simpson denied any participation in the crime, the FBI found numerous evidence that proved hands down that he was the murderer. After a trial that lasted more than eight months, he was acquitted and was able to go home. Personally, I feel that the jury made the wrong decision.

Majority of the jury was not representative of the defendant’s peers. Most of them wanted to quickly vote guilty and punish the defendant. There were many exaggerations. Biases included where the defendant grew up, what race he was, and his age. In reality, a jury does their best to prove if the defendant is guilty or not because they are handing an individual’s life. There are biases in reality, but those are ruled out when picking out a jury. An example of groupthink in the film included when one juror, specifically the one who had a son, pressured everyone else to choose the verdict of guilty. He would ridicule those who did not agree with him. Another example of groupthink was when juror #8 threatened the juror with a son. He caused that

JEAN RIMBACHEmail: "2 RETURN TO COUNTY COPS AFTER ACQUITTAL." Record (Bergen County, NJ). 2014, June 07: L1.

The people directly involved with this case are Judge Lance Ito, the prosecution lawyers, Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden, the defense lawyers, Johnnie Cochran, Robert Shapiro and Robert Blasier , the jury and the defendant, O.J. Simpson. The families of the victims have also been present in the courtroom, as well as other spectators and news media. This case has heard one hundred and twenty witnesses over a nine month period.

as a citizen by sitting on the jury with the help of a signer - but

On July 20, 2017, O.J. Simpson was scheduled to have his parole trial after being in jail for armed robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, and kidnapping. Celebrities have been known to have less harsh punishments for crime compared to an everyday person. O.J. Simpson had already been acquitted of the two brutal murders of his ex-wife and another man. He also was granted parole after only serving close to nine years in prison for the previously listed charges of assault, kidnapping, and armed robbery. A blog post will be used to explore bias in celebrity crime trials, such as jurors altering their vote just because they admire the person. This admiration can blind people from obvious

Outlined in the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution is the criminal defendants right to a public trial by an impartial jury, meaning that all juries should be fair and unbiased. Unfortunately in our American Criminal Justice system today, it is nearly impossible to find a jury full of unbiased citizens. Throughout the film the characters remain anonymous, expect for the fact that they drop subtle hints to their underlying biases. For example, we are aware that the defendant is a minority of that time, and of low social standing. Immediately, biases are set within the jurors whether they are aware of it or not.

The Selection and Role of a Jury in a Criminal Trial This assignment focuses on how a jury is selected and its role in a

Justice Evatt delivered a paper to the Australian Legal Convention which entitled “The Jury System in Australia” in 1936 . Justice Evatt’s thesis of Jury trials was that “in modern day society the jury system is regarded as an essential feature of real democracy”. Jury trials in the nineteenth century were found way before in four colonies Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia . When Trial by Judge alone was first introduced in South Australian thirty eight were held in the Supreme Court between 1989 and 1993, meaning all annual percentage of all criminal trials in the court ranged between 3.9% and 8.9% . The Juries Act SA 1927 was amended many times making some major changes. In 1966, women were introduced in the South Australian Jury system as only men were capable of serving on Juries. An increase to the number of jurors available to contribute in a criminal trial was amended in 2004 . It now states in the Juries Act 1927 under section 6A that if court agrees there are good reasons to add additional jurors of 2 or 3 it can be empanelled for a criminal trial .

Within the court proceedings, the first reality video explains the process of jury selection, or what they would call jury “rejection.” They think of it as rejection because they are not really picking the juries they are rejecting the ones they do not need. What I knew before watching this film is that juries are a set of citizens chosen to appear in court to hear and help come to a verdict about a trial. Somethig new that I learned was that jurors must fill out a questionaire so that the attorney are easily able to pick who they would want on the panel.

Thoughtout the trial of the jury, I’ve saw all three characters stand against their case and try to defend their case. Even though, the character and defense attorney give great evidence against the reason on committing sin. The prosecutors did a well job of giving opposing side of the defendant. This caused me to wonder which out the the three characters committed the greatest sin.

The jury causes a great waste of time. It has been pointed out that a trial by jury usually requires two to three times the amount of time

Some Jurors will reach a quick verdict or not properly think over the evidence just to get it over and done with so they can go home.

Richard Jury is the fictional lead in the Richard Jury series of novels by bestselling American mystery thriller writer Martha Grimes. Grimes wrote the first novel featuring the lead character Jury titled The Man With a Load of Mischief in 1981. The novels series is so popular that over three decades since first publication, it is still ongoing.