If a jury fails or refuses to convict a defendant in a criminal trial even though there if proof of guilt, jury nullification takes place. This is because the jury believes the law is being biased or unjust. If jury nullification is used in an honest and appropriate manner, it is likely to favor minorities in the courtroom in terms of sentencing for the crime committed as opposed to it being based on race. Most people that are picked to be on a jury do not know about jury nullification. A jury, juror, or judge can nullify a case in almost any
This classification makes sense because if crime is caused by terrorists; terrorist will cause crimes. If the majority of minorities are in prisons, then people of color will end up in prison. On the opposing side of racial profiling, many minorities feel that it is a form of racial discrimination that only hurts the good image law enforcement upholds. For example, the California Highway Patrol has recently been taken to court for the misuse of racial profiling. Therefore, a compromise must be made because it would be ideological to believe that there can be a government that bans the use of racial identification.
Moreover, further statistics show that black people are seven times more likely and Asians twice as likely to stopped by police compared to their white counterparts. Some may say that racism can be a result of a ‘canteen culture’ where some officers hold negative stereotypes of ethnic minorities and pass on their views to their colleagues which will lead in a general negative stereotype among the police force. Reiner explains that characteristics of canteen cultures include cynicism, suspicion, macho values and racism. On the other hand, the McPherson inquiry after the murder case of Stephen Lawrence concluded that the police force was institutionally racist. This meant that police procedures and culture disadvantaged non-white people in an indirectly racist way.
Contrastingly whites are underrepresented. However such statistics do not tell us whether members of one ethnic group are more likely than members of another ethnic group to commit an offence in the first place; they just tell us about involvement in the criminal justice system. For example differences in stop and search or arrest rates may be due to police racism, while differences in rates of imprisonment may be the result of courts handing down harsher sentences on minorities. There are other sources of statistics to reveal link of ethnicity and offending. Victim surveys ask individuals to say what crimes they have been victims of.
Jury Nullification Paper John Doe CJA 344 August 2012 Instructor Name Jury Nullification Paper Jury Nullification and it’s affects on the criminal justice system. Jury Nullification is a process that allows jurors to acquit an individual, even when they are technically guilty, and not warrant for punishment. In essence the juror are suggesting that the law in general is unfair or in a particular case. Jury Nullification “Is rooted in English common law and is sometimes used in cases, in which the jury believes a prosecutor enforced an unpopular law or a jury sympathizes with the defendant” (McNamara & Burns, 2009, p. 265). Because of perceived mistreatment of African American by the criminal justice system, Jury Nullification has become controversial because a number of well-known African American scholars encouraged Black jurors to acquit Black defendants (McNamara & Burns, 2009).
Racism can be one of the leading causes for the nullification of a verdict. The same racism exists today driving juries to nullify the law in favor of or against a person charged with a crime. The ethnicity of jurors can influence whether or not nullification takes place. “Jury nullification is often attributed to juries that identify with and share the same characteristics as the defendant, such as the defendant’s racial or ethnic background, socioeconomic status, or value system. The occurrence of this type of nullification has been attributed to a potential response to social conditions, including the perception that the criminal justice system targets minorities,” (Keneally, 2010-2011, p. 945-946).
Experimental research suggests that these racial depictions of criminality have an impact on White viewers, who are more likely to believe a perpetrator is Black even when no picture of a suspect is shown (Gilliam & Iyengar, 2000), and they are more inclined to believe a Black suspect is guilty, deserving of punishment and likely to recidivate (Peffley, Shields, & Williams, 1996). Television dramas about crime and criminal justice are extremely popular. Many crime dramas take real news stories and turn them into works of fiction, a tactic commonly referred to as the ‘‘ripped from the headlines approach’’ made famous by the television series Law and Order (Britto, Hughes, Saltzman, & Stroh, 2007). This can blur the line between fiction and reality and may create the perception that rare and particularly heinous crimes are common. Most prior research, however, has found little relationship between consumption of crime dramas and opinions about crime and criminal justice, such as attitudes about the police (Callanan & Rosenberger, 2011; Dowler & Zawilski, 2007; Eschholz et al., 2002).
According to Terry Lenamon, expert Criminal Trial Attorney, the first, and most popular, is the “M’Naghten test.” Lenamon says, “Under M’Naghten, the determining factor is whether or not the defendant was (1) able to understand what he (or she) was doing at the time of the crime due to some “defect of reason or disease of the mind” or, (2) if he (or she) was aware of what they were doing, that he (or she) nevertheless failed to comprehend or understand that what they were doing was wrong” (Lenamon). With that in mind, think about how many inmates have not taken that test and have been wrongly convicted. The American Civil Liberties Union states, “Mental Health America, estimates that five to ten percent of all death row inmates suffer from a severe mental illness.” Furthermore, if these people could get tested, they would realize how many people are legally insane and do not deserve to be in jail, but rather a hospital. Consequently, some of the individuals sitting on death row may
These hoaxes amplify society’s image of the criminalblackman. These white-on-black racial hoaxes are often times believed immediately because society finds it highly likely that a black person did indeed commit the crime. Often times the perpetrators of these racial hoaxes are only charged with filing a false police report, if any charges are brought at all. In the event the perpetrator is charged with the crime they are trying to cover up, it is less likely that any additional charges will be filed for the hoax since they are already being charged with the more serious crime. Typically there is not amends of any kind made to the person or the community that has been affected by the hoax; not even a simple apology.
Aside from the verdict from the Hinckley trial, the public’s view on the insanity defense is not altogether accurate. There’s a misconception that criminals who use this type of reasoning as a plea can evade punishment. When it comes to the use of the insanity defense, only about one percent of criminals use this type of justification. By using the insanity defense, the criminal is admitting they are guilty of the crime however they are requesting a not guilty verdict based on the state of mind they were in at the time of the crime. This can get tricky for a defendant because if not proven mentally ill, they will be found guilty and usually endure a harsher sentencing for the crime.