What Role Does Jury Service Play?

The uncertain discrimination persists in the legal system with no intention of remedying it. Not only are black citizens being discriminated outside a court room, but also inside where an offense has not been committed. The selection of jurors must be based on a selection of rules. However, it comes from years back, in 1987, black jurors were systematically dismissed. Reasons given as for the motive of their eliminations are not based upon the Batson v Kentucky case. Not making eye contact, being a social worker, divorced, female and/or being well educated are among the reasons brought up at the time of jury selection. It is critically coming out of control how discriminatory the system has become and the fact that the appellant courts continue

Firstly, i want to touch on the subject of religious beliefs. Is that a good enough reason to not serve on a Jury? I do not believe so. Yes, the bible does tell us not to judge each other, because we all have sinned. But, does being a juror really means passing judgement in that sense? When a group of people participate on a jury they are usually presented with evidence, testimony from eye witness and/ or expert testimony, from professionals, such as psychologists. So, it is really judgement based on the evidence presented or lack thereof. Therefore, no one should be able to use religious belief as an excuse to not participate in the legal system of the democracy in which they are apart of.

Though steps have been taken to ensure more representation in juries, attorneys still use loopholes to their advantage. Through a legal strategy called “peremptory challenge,” lawyers can dismiss potential jurors without stating a reason. This has been used to further the disparities between race, ethnicity, socio-economic class, gender, and sexuality in jury sessions. When citizens of different backgrounds are denied their seat in jury because of their identity, it contradicts the nature of juries: to have people of unique upbringings represent the community. To reform this system, lawyers should be required to state a reason as to why a juror has been excused.

Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then

There is so many reasons why which I explained throughout the whole paper. I just think that the person is not being treated the way they should be if that was to happen under those grounds. Also it’s kind of like you are judging he jury because you think that they might feel or might not feel a certain way about the case. Your race and gender should have nothing to do with your decision when you are sitting on a jury stand ready to determine how so one will spend the rest of their life. I would never want to be in that situation and I wouldn’t want anyone else to be. I do not think I would feel comfortable being excluded from a jury because of my race. No matter what my race is I should get an opportunity to sit on a jury just like others. Also my gender should not matter because whether the defendant is a male or female, wrong is wrong and there is no sympathizing with someone who is clearly wrong. I am happy that this topic is being talked about because to me it is a big issue. I feel like certain people think that there’s no problem with excluding jurors but in all reality it is. Like I’ve mentioned before, according to sixth amendment you have the right to an impartial trial and when you are excluding jurors for certain reasons that is affecting your rights. Also that leads into the 14th amendment which is the

There is no information out there for people to read or hear about what jury duty is. There are too many different areas of the jury system. With this people are able to find ways to get out of having to go through jury duty. This leads to shortage of citizens to participate in jury duty. Canada is such a multicultural country and yet so little of it is shown throughout jury duty. The majority of people who are chosen to serve as a juror are your typical Canadian citizen. The Canadian jury system currently has a good structure but with this there is always room for improvement. In order to improve the current system the public need to be more aware of their civic responsibility to serve on a jury, In addition, the jury selection process must be simplified so that it is easier to find those who are capable and willing to be jurors. Finally, in order for it to be truly effective juries must better represent the diversity of the Canadian

Sommers, S. (2009, January 1). On the Obstacles to Jury Diversity. In www.thejuryepert.com. Retrieved November 29, 2014, from

Jury Nullification is the process that allows members of the juror to acquit a defendant for crimes they do not feel is grounds for punishment. Although, many jurors may not know this is an option to many cases, it is still an option. If citizens use this option in many of the courtroom proceedings, there will be fewer people who are serving time in prison. On the other hand, this does interfere with the decision- making process. This paper will explain whether ethnicity influences courtroom proceedings and judicial practices. It will summarize the arguments for and against ethnicity-based jury nullification. Including contemporary examples of

Since the jury is a group of twelve people, it is safe to assume that they will come from different backgrounds, educational levels, religions, and ethnic groups. This does not mean that all diverse groups will be represented, but it is enough to offer diverse perspectives. This variety helps to eliminate any undue prejudice or bias that could be present in either a small group or single individual. Because these people have no association with anyone involved in the trial, they have no personal or financial reason to be biased. They will not be personally impacted by the outcome of the trials. This should result in an unbiased decision by the jury. A positive side effect of the jury system is that it affords the jurors a basic knowledge and education of the judicial system. Other than voting, it is the jury system that provides the most citizens an opportunity to be involved in government. Although we can learn about the judicial process in books, the experience of being a part of the system by participating on a jury is a more meaningful way of understanding the

In other words, courts are struggling to successfully and randomly select jury pools with a structure which reflects the racially diverse populations they serve. One reason which has been identified as a cause of this struggle is a “key factor associated with the underrepresentation of minorities is that jury questionnaires in many predominantly minority areas come back to the court as undeliverable or do not come back at all” (Joshi & Kline, n.d.). So, if the court cannot locate a potential juror or does not obtain a completed form back, this significantly cuts down on the potential jurors which Prosecutors and Defenders have to choose from. By implementing a mandated jury for each and every criminal trial, not only are the benefits of receiving an impartial and fair trial increased, but the opportunity to have the evidence heard in order to come to a verdict rather than basing it off of the defendant’s race or gender is also

Jury selection beings with a summons being sent out to all eligible adults. These summons, in Canada, are sent out randomly in order to obtain representativeness amongst the jury members (Friedland, 1990). While this seems to be the best way of obtaining impartial jurors, it sometimes ends up creating other problems through-out the trial. The Crown and defense try to avoid problems, such as bias, impartiality, pre-trial publicity, and polarization, during jury

First, a good juror would need to be not racist, or sexist, because it would make the system more fair. On page 16 juror 10 states that “You can’t believe a word they say.” When you put a certain person with a group of people, and label it “them or they” you are most likely against them. Also on page 16, juror 9 states against juror 10 stating, “What a terrible thing for a man to believe! Since when is dishonesty a group characteristic?” Defending the accused, and the rest of the jury from his statement. In conclusion, with no racism or sexism in America’s criminal justice system, everything

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

The US courts were put in place to examine a case and make a legal decision that will settle the dispute. These courts have flaws that affect the outcome of justice being served and falsely incriminate the innocent. Courts utilize a jury to see the different perspectives throughout the trial and determine a verdict, while the judge creates a sentence appropriate to the offense. The jurors are required to come to a non-bias decision but that not always the situation. Decisions are sometimes made on the race, religion, ethnicity and/or sexual orientation of the defendant, no matter their innocence. In research done in “What It’s Like to Be Black in the Criminal Justice System”, Andrew

The jury system of a trial is an essential element of the democratic process. It attempts to secure fairness in the justice system. Traditionally, the jury system has been viewed as a cornerstone of common law procedure. However, the use of the system of trial by jury is on the decline. Today, its use differs, depending on whether (a) it is a civil or criminal matter, and (b) in criminal matters, whether it is a summary or an indictable offence.