What Role Do Jurors Play In A Trial?

He is polite and makes a point of speaking with proper English grammar. He is the fourth to ultimately vote not guilty

In the essay, “Trial Lawyers Cater to Jurors Demands for Visual Evidence,” by Sylvia Hsieh, elicits the symbiotic relationship between trial attorneys and the technological developments used in the court room. He illustrates, how these technical improvements impact the demands and perception of jurors. He also expresses they are reasonably priced, yet faces evidentiary challenges. He engenders the cause and ramifications of technology utilized in the court of law with its added benefits while concluding its pitfalls.

4. Jurors are allowed to read peer-reviewed scholarly works (journal articles) to expand their knowledge on

There are many ways to get around this rule, including that it is very easy to lie to someone you’ve never seen before. They don't easily recognize nervous ticks the way a person who knows you personally would.Some jurors can be uninformed about the trial or ignorant to the case. Some jurors could be blinded by hatred or prejudice to the defendant and the lawyers would never know, “But the lawyers aren’t allowed to ask overly personal questions, and they aren't allowed ask the jurors how they would decide the case in advance”(Streicker). For example, defence lawyers have found extreme bias after cases in juries: “With the trial judge's permission, the lawyers then obtained affidavits from the jurors, in which the jurors quoted H.C. as saying that, ...he knew that the defendant was guilty "because he's Mexican" and "Mexican men ... think they can 'do whatever they want' with women," and that where he used to patrol, "nine times out of ten Mexican men were guilty of being aggressive toward women and young girls." “(Totenberg). There have also been many scientific trials questioning this problem: “Participants' questionnaires revealed that the jurors gave more weight to mitigating evidence when the defendant was white than when he was black, and were significantly more likely to improperly use mitigating evidence in favor of a death sentence when the defendant was black”(Lynch, M., and C. Haney). The fact that jurors are handpicked

Does the exclusion of a juror on the grounds of race, gender, religion or sexual orientation affect a defendant’s right to an impartial trial?

During jury selection, potential jurors are interviewed then chosen or eliminated from the jury. The initial selection of potential jurors is completely random; citizens get “jury Duty” notices on a random basis. The screening of the jury selection is conducted by both the prosecution and the defense, and is overviewed by the judge on the case. During the interview, citizens are asked a number of strategic questions to ensure that they are not in any way bias for or against the defendant or case. The questions also eliminate those who have any connection to the case, in any way. It is during this interview that the lawyers on the case can voice their concerns regarding biased jurors.

Juries specifically in the United States serve a very large political significance. Majority of the time they determine the fate of those on trial. Juries are used to protect the rights of the people and work hand in hand with the judge to determine the outcome of cases to the best of their ability. Working hand in hand means the Judge determines what laws are applied to each specific case, while the jury works to decide on the facts. Jurors are held to a high degree due to the fact they must focus on fact, remain impartial, and be honest. Very much power is given to juries in the court of law which in turn shows that large political significance juries hold. While juries hold a large significance politically, one of arguably their strongest weapons is the use of jury nullification. Jury nullification refers to right of juries to nullify, or refuse to apply law in criminal cases despite facts that support a finding that the law was violated. It is an extremely powerful component of law because a defendant could have all the facts and evidence pointing to their guilt, but if the jury feels a certain way about a law or situation, then they have the right to pass on all the facts presented and acquit a defendant that in most cases would be found guilty. Also they could use if they found a specific law being applied to the defendant as an unjust law or the way a law is applied. But largely in the past, specifically during the Jim Crow era, it was used as a way to acquit those

In a court room you have a judge, lawyers, a defendant, a plaintiff, a witnesses, an audience, and a group of twelve people who decide the defendant 's fate—the jury. The lawyers and witnesses main jobs are to convince the jury that the defendant or the plaintiff deserves justice. This is exactly what Emma Goldman does in her speech "Address to the Jury" delivered in 1917. Goldman is trying to defend herself and her co-defendant, Alexander Berkman, that they were not doing non-conscription activities. At this time period a non-conscription activity is someone hiding from being drafted. In Goldman 's "Address to the Jury" she uses repetition, anecdotes, and dramatic pauses to prove to the jury that the defendant and herself are not guilty.

Serving Jury Duty - Serving jury duty is a requirement of a citizen to be apart of a jury when instructed. At jury duty, 12 selected citizens must hear and see the evidence in the case and decided whether the accuser is innocent or guilty. This duty is significant because the U.S. government promises that anyone who is accused of a crime will have the right to a trial by jury.

The jury system and how it works is crucial to sentencing and how cases are solved. Most criminal trials require twelve jurors. The reason it’s done this way is because it’s believed that the more people there are exercising their own perception and judgement it leads to a greater chance of a fair

Juries are selected from the general population; they are to be a representation of the people from that area. In trials with a jury, the first step is the selection of jurors. The jury selection process starts with something called voir dire, which is Latin for “to speak the truth”. Voir dire is where either the lawyers or the judge ask potential jurors questions about matters deemed to be significant to the trial. The judge may be asked to dismiss a juror for cause by the lawyer if incompetence or likely bias has been proven. (Baum, 2013) For example, a juror can be dismissed for cause if he or she is related to anyone involved in the case including the defendant or a lawyer, or if a company that is part of the lawsuit employs him or her. Each lawyer may request the dismissal of jurors for cause with no limit. (American Bar Association, 2016) Both sides are allowed a limited number of peremptory challenges, which are how a juror can be dismissed without having to show cause. The lawyer is to dismiss because they believe the person to be unable to serve in the best interest of the client not because of race or sex. (American Bar

Even though a little more of felony convictions are handled by juries, some attorneys perspectives encourage a trial by jury, arguments can be made in favor for jury trials that reinforce the risk for a negative outcome is low. Jury trial practices have evolved depending on the state, some states permit “jurors to take notes) (308) “Other practices, such as providing at least one written copy of instruction and providing guidance on conducting deliberations, are also common in state courts.”(308-309. To minimize the risk of bias interpretation of judgment upon the alleged crime, attorneys try to play toward the juror’s conscience. If they are fully aware of what their findings mean to the defendant and they do not consider all facts by the

In every case whether that be criminal or civil there is going to be a judge that oversees the proceedings. They also have a say on who is picked to sit on the jury, or acts as the jury when one is not applicable. The judge makes sure that each party has adequate speaking times and that chaos does not occur throughout the trial. As stated by Garland (2015), the judge’s duty is to maintain control over the conduct of those involved and if needed can exercise the power of contempt. Contempt is given when a person(s) becomes disorderly and disruptive to the proceeding which may result in being held in jail over a period of time, or result in paying fines. In a court case, there are many important people involved. One being the prosecutor. The

The history in England and Europe was of people being sentenced to lengthy prison terms, tortured or even killed in secret trials. If you were accused in this situation, you often had no chance to defend yourself and the charges were often trumped up to eliminate political and religious dissent. By requiring a jury to be involved in a trial, serious and sometimes fatal decisions are taken out of the hands of one or a few judges, and are put into the hands of a group of average citizens who look over the evidence. This greatly reduces the possibility of corruption in the trial. For many years, all juries in America had twelve people, which is how juries were conducted during the time the Constitution was written. Eventually, though, the Supreme Court reduced the allowable size of juries in state trials down to a minimum of six. Federal trials must still have twelve jurors. The Court also removed the requirement that juries be unanimous in their decisions in state courts. Instead, 10-2 or 9-3 verdicts are now accepted. Federal court juries, however, must be unanimous.

[3] It is very important for the actor of the court who is questioning the potential jurors to make the panel feel comfortable and keep in mind that some of them might not be comfortable answering some questions in front of others. [3] Therefore, the questions should be open ended in order to try to find out who might be a good juror and who will not and who is trying to hide something. [3] It is also recommend to have a paralegal who can assist with taking notes during the questioning so that the actor of the court making the questions can only focus on that tasks and it can also help the jurors feel more comfortable as well. [3] The notes taken during questioning should include names and descriptions of each potential juror as well as how they answered the questions, what were they doing during questioning, their body position, and were they talking with other jurors among other descriptions. [3] This will help the attorneys or the judge later when they decide which juror will be part of the trial and which will not.