Describe and evaluate factors affecting jury decision making. Jury decision making involves the process of twelve randomly selected members of the public, to decide upon the verdict whether a criminal is either guilty or not guilty for their previous actions that has resulted in them being in this situation. The jury can either be all male or all female or mixed. A person will know if they are to be part of a jury as they will receive a summons through the post informing them of their duty. In the United Kingdom, to be part of a jury you must be in between the ages of 18 and 70 and be registered on the electoral roll.
Another major point is that our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. DNA testing and other methods of modern crime scene science can now effectively eliminate almost all uncertainty as to a person's guilt or innocence. Prisoner parole or escapes can give criminals another chance to kill. This contributes to the problem of overpopulation in the prison system. Has one ever thought of the victim’s family when the whole court cases are going on?
The judges are more active and involved in the inquisitorial system than the adversarial system. The inquisitorial system is more direct in seeking the truth whereas adversarial system takes time til the truth comes out. The inquisitorial system is used more around the world but some countries use a mixture of both elements from each system. The adversarial system protects their criminal defendants throughout the whole court time til they are guilty or not. Inquisitorial system usually has one judge or a small group doing all the decision making whereas in the adversarial system there are 12 people in a jury and all of the 12 jury discusses the matter before giving them their group answer made up of the majority 0votes.
The jurors cannot base their certainty on concrete evidence as the play indicates that very few facts are absolute because (quote). Instead, they must make up their minds based on the apparent likelihood of various events and on their own personal beliefs. Rose portrays that when it is difficult to maintain certainty about one’s beliefs, in this case the innocence or guilt of the boy, doubt is a reasonable and intelligent state of mind. This is proven by the 4th Juror and the 11th Juror when they say they “ … now have reasonable doubt”. Each of the jurors has a different degree of certainty about the opinions they hold, but cannot be completely sure, as the 9th Juror points out “He doesn’t say the boy is not guilty.
Other times, criminalists lacking the requisite knowledge have embellished findings and eluded detection because judges and juries lacked background in the relevant sciences, themselves. In some cases, critical evidence has been consumed or destroyed, so that re-testing to uncover misconduct has proven impossible. Evidence in these cases can never be tested again, preventing the truth from being
There is only about a 3% difference with the retention of a private lawyer or a public defender as to how often counsel plea bargains a case(Associated Content, Inc., 2010). Showing that plea bargaining truthfully helps the criminal justice system in the aspect of the over crowding issues that have greatly increased over the years, but as well it helps the criminals get back to the streets in a shorter amount of time. Leaving a greater opportunity for those criminals to enter back into society doing the same things that got them into trouble in the first place. Meaning that plea bargaining is a positive thing , but also in some ways has no purpose if those criminals that bargain are just going to get lesser charges and reduce a lengthy sentencing so they can get back out and do it all over again. Thats why I believe that plea bargaining should be reanalyzed to find ways in using this aspect as well as making sure that the accused has learned their lesson while having a lesser chance of entering back into society with the intent of returning to old habits.
It is so deeply entrenched in our constitution that, unless express statutory language indicates otherwise, the highest possible forensic standard of proof is required to be established before the right is removed. That is criminal standard.” Lord Devlin justified the jury trial in his Hamlyn Lectures on the jury system as he regarded “The best blend of logic and common sense” as being in the verdict of 12 jurors. The decision often has to be judged from the witness’s demeanor and his way of giving evidence.” Normally a jury consists of 12 people. The Members of the jury are known as jurors. The jury is the panel of lay people, a cross section of society, selected at random.
It's popular throughout Europe and British Isles. They are group of people form citizens, but not any legal person. To be precise, it is a body of persons sworn to judge and give a verdict on a given matter, especially a body of persons summoned by law and sworn to hear and hand down a verdict upon a case presented in court. There are 12 jurors on criminal jury whereas 6 juror in civil jury. The Constitution of Australia provides in section 80 that 'the trial on indictment of any offence against any law of the Commonwealth shall be by jury'.
It is the jury to decide whether or not the defendant is guilty. The jurors are selected by a computer which produces a list of possible jurors from the registrar. Section 321 of Schedule 33 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 substitutes new provisions into the Juries Act 1974 under which every person is qualified to serve as a juror in the Crown Court, the High Court and the County Courts and is liable to attend for jury service if summoned only if: 1. They are registered as a parliamentary or local government elector and not less than 18 years of age nor more than 70 years old. 2.
95%of criminal offences are tried and dealt with in magistrates’ court. It also has the criminal jurisdiction to issue search and arrest warrants, decide on bail applications and sending trials to crown court where they will be tried before a judge and jury. The magistrates’ court has limited powers in passing judgement, which is a maximum of £5000 in fines, six months in prison or twelve months for concurrent offences. The magistrates are not legally qualified but are trained and made up of three people. They are not paid except for expenses but in some towns the magistrates’ court can be conducted by a full time, paid, legally qualified magistrate called district judge.