Juries Disadvantages

578 Words3 Pages
Advantages of using Juries • A juror’s role is to be unbiased and impartial, make a judgement solely on the evidence they are presented with. They are to be fair and open-minded. • 12 jurors are selected at random to and are supposed to be ‘everyday people’ who represent and uphold the views of society. Excludes certain people, eg. Criminals, legal professionals, doctors, emergency services, disabled, non-English speakers. • Prosecution and defence have the right to challenge jurors, through peremptory challenges (disqualify without reason) and challenges for cause (disqualified for a reason such as bias or relation to defendant). • Jurors have to decide a verdict and determine whether the accused if guilty or not guilty, which is a majority…show more content…
Disadvantages of using juries • May present bias or may be influenced by the media or their own personal beliefs when reaching a verdict, resulting in possibly an injustice for accused. • There may be people in the jury who do not take the case seriously and are not a good representative of society, leading to an unfair trial. Also excluding a majority of well educated people (especially legal professionals) may misrepresent society and alter the verdict of a case if uneducated people are deciding guilt or innocence. • Challenging a juror can be difficult as it is usually based on nothing more than their name and physical appearance. Another randomly selected person is brought in to replace the disqualified person, so it is a gamble when challenging jurors. • Jurors do not have a time limit when reaching a verdict. This is harmful and unjust to the accused if they are in remand waiting for their verdict, and may be not guilty. If jurors can’t reach a majority verdict, it is called a ‘hung jury’. Case is then dismissed and a retrial occurs. This is resource inefficient as it is time consuming, holds up other trials and expensive to the parties and tax
Open Document