Pros and Cons of Sequestering Trial Juries

988 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: An essay on the boston massacre

The first case of jury sequestering in America occurred in the week or so long trial of the Boston Massacre in 1770. In the twentieth century, jurisdictions began to move away from mandatory sequestering of juries. Previously, in both criminal and civil cases, jury sequestering was mandatory. Now sequestration is on a state-to-state basis. In most states, sequestering of the jury is no longer mandatory even in capital cases. Due to the excessive media coverage of this case, I do believe the jury should be sequestered. Kobe Bryant is a very high profile athlete with many supporters as well as those who believe he is guilty. A sequestered jury would benefit both the prosecution and defense. The isolation of the jury would help to ensure a fair trial by preventing exposure to prejudicial publicity. In a jury trial, the evidence the jurors use to render a verdict should come only from the prosecution and defense. Such evidence is protected by the "Rules of Evidence" enforced by the judge. This case also presents special circumstances due to the "Rape Shield Law" a non-sequestered jury will be exposed to evidence not allowed by law at the trial that could prejudice their verdict. In a trial with the notoriety of the Bryant, trial sequestration also makes sure jurors are not pressured by the views of others they might come in contact with in the general public. Finally, sequestration protects jurors from threats that might be made by people trying to influence the verdict. On the other hand, sequestration can be very expensive. There were jurors in the O.J. Simpson trial who reported psychological harm because of the separation from their families due to sequestration. With sequestration, a representative j... ... middle of paper ... ...a reason, the change venue it is a potential issue that could have a negative impact on a black man's chance of getting a fair trial in this matter. Denver, CO 554,636 pop. with 61,649 pop. that is black which would be a good location and a location demographically in the State of Colorado where this defendant could receive a fair trial. To offer the defendant in this matter a fair trial with an impartial jury guaranteed by the 6th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and again in Brisbin v. Schauer, 176 Colo. 550, 492 P.2d 835 (1971). In conclusion, I believe that, even though not mandatory, sequestration of the jury is necessary to insure that Mr. Bryant receives a fair trial without the interference of or commentary by the media, sequestration is the only logical solution aside from a change in the location of the trial.

Show More
Related

  • Dbq Essay On The Jury System

    921 Words  | 2 Pages

    The American Jury system has been around for quite some time. It was the original idea that the framers of the constitution had wanted to have implemented as a means of trying people for their illegal acts, or for civil disputes. The jury system has stood the test of time as being very effective and useful for the justice system. Now it has come into question as to if the jury system is still the best method for trials. In the justice system there are two forms of trials, one being the standard jury trial, where 12 random members of society come together to decide the outcome of something. The other option would be to have a bench trial. In a bench trial, the judge is the only one deciding the fate of the accused. While both methods are viable

    Read More

  • Runaway Jury: Depiction of Jury Tampering and Jury Sequestering

    1020 Words  | 3 Pages

    Jury duty is the obligation to serve on a jury. There are many reasons for being excused if summoned, here are some: having no public or private transportation or having to exceed 1 ½ hours to travel to the trial (http://www.courti…); if you are under 18 or older than 70 (choose not to serve), or if you are not a US resident with a home in the state (http://www.cga …); if you cannot speak or understand English; or is a constitutional officer, a family support magistrate, a judge, or a member of the general assembly (http://www.cga …). After being selected for jury duty, one is at risk of jury tampering which is a crime where someone attempts to influence the jury via means other than those presented during the trial (http://le...

    Read More

  • Nine Ten by Warren Leight

    658 Words  | 2 Pages

    There are hundreds of Americans who are selected for jury duty every day. Just like the characters many of them believe jury duty is a major conflict in their lives. They may say they do not have time to participate, which may be true, but the law will make sure you have time. As always, life and time keep going, and nobody wants to miss it. No one prefers to sit in court when they can be doing something productive but it is not going to kill them. Everyone deserves to have a jury hear them and surely they would want that for themselves.

    Read More

  • Australia's Unfair Legal System

    821 Words  | 2 Pages

    The jury system originated in England and has so far failed in cases (all too common) when defendants are wrongfully prosecuted or convicted of crimes which they did not commit. In societies without a jury system, panels of judges act as decision makers.

    Read More

  • The Use of the Peremptory Challenge in the U.S. Legal System

    2601 Words  | 6 Pages

    What many American do not realize is that the concept of peremptory challenges has been around since the Roman era, but controversy over the topic in America did not come about until the twentieth century (Henley 1). Under Roman law, each litigant was allowed to select 100 jurors and then strike as many as 50 people from the jury pool (1). English Common law allowed the defendant 35 peremptory challenges, while the prosecution had an unlimited amount (1). This system was alive in England until 1305 when Parliament outlawed the prosecution’s right to peremptory challenges (1). It took over 600 years for Parliament to do the same with the rights to challenges for defendants in 1988 (1). The American legal system, being based on British common law, has always allowed for the use of peremptory challenges. One reasoning behind this fact is the American tradition of challenges (6). To be exact, the reason we continue to use peremptory challenges ...

    Read More

  • The Judicial Process and Batson Case

    2726 Words  | 6 Pages

    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 separating them into smaller groups to be seated in the jury box. The judge and or attorneys ask questions with intent to determine if any juror is biased or cannot deal with the issues fairly. The question process is referred to as voir dire, a French word meaning, “to see to speak”. During voir dire, attorneys have the right to excuse a juror in peremptory challenges. Peremptory challenges are based on the potential juror admitting bias, acquaintanceship with one of the parties, personal knowledge of the facts, or the attorney believing he/she might not be impartial. In the case of Batson v. Kentucky, James Batson, a black man, was indicted for second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the selection of the jury the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike out all of the four black potential jurors, leaving an all white jury. Batson’s attorney moved to discharge the venire, the list from which jurors may be selected, on the grounds that the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges violated his client’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury derived from a “cross-section of the community”(People v. Wheeler, 583 P.3d 748 [Calif. 1978]). The circuit court ruled in favor of the prosecutor and convicted Batson on both counts. This case went through the courts and finalized in the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Read More

  • Jury Nullification: Power, Impact and Controversy

    1444 Words  | 3 Pages

    For example, all-white juries in the post-civil war South routinely convicted black defendants accused of sex crimes against white women despite minimal evidence of guilt (Streicker, 2014). Jury nullification only affects a single case in which it is used, not the actual law. A consistent pattern of acquittals for prosecutions of a certain offense can have the practical effect of invalidating a law, therefore leading the Supreme Court to alter a law or implement a new one. History of Nullification Since the Founding Fathers produced documents laying out the platform of government to run the United States, jury nullification was implemented as a way for people to disagree with the law and not prosecute individuals based on personal opinions. The law limits the courts' ability to inquire into jurors' motivations during or after a verdict.

    Read More

  • The History of Juries

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.

    Read More

  • Analysis of the Jurors in 12 Angry Men

    714 Words  | 2 Pages

    In all criminal cases presented in the courts of the United States, a defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The law requires the jury to release the defendant unless it is fully convinced of the defendant's guilt. Many times it may be difficult for a jury to come to such a significant conclusion. This is clearly evident in the movie 12 Angry Men. At first, each juror is convinced of his verdict except one. Yet of those who are convinced that the boy on trial is guilty, all change their vote except one.

    Read More

  • Should Juries Be Abolished?

    1260 Words  | 3 Pages

    From conception in the Magna Carta 1215, juries have become a sacred constitutional right in the UK’s justice system, with the independence of the jury from the judge established in the R v. Bushel’s case 1670. Although viewed by some as a bothersome and an unwelcomed duty, by others it is perceived to be a prized and inalienable right, and as Lord Devlin comments ‘ trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution : it is the lamp that shows freedom lives.’ It is arguable that juries bring a ‘unique legitimacy’ to the judicial process, but recently it seems that their abolition may be the next step forward for the UK in modernising and making the judicial system more effective. Many argue that jurors lack the expertise and knowledge to make informed verdicts, along with views that external forces are now influencing juries more heavily, especially after the emergence of the internet and the heavy presence it now has on our lives. Yet, corruption within the jury system is also internal, in that professionals and academics may ‘steamroll’ others during deliberations about the case. These factors, coupled with the exorbitant costs that come along with jury trials creates a solid case for the abolition of juries. On the other hand though, the jury system carries many loyal supporters who fear its abolition may be detrimental to society. Academics and professionals such as John Morris QC state that; 'it may well not be the perfect machine, but it is a system that has stood the test of time.’ Juries ensure fair-practice within the courtroom, and although controversial, they have the power to rule on moral and social grounds, rather than just legal pre...

    Read More

  • Arguments For and Against Juries

    692 Words  | 2 Pages

    Arguments For and Against Juries The right to a trial by jury is a tradition that goes right to the the heart of the British legal system. It is a right fiercely fought for. and fiercely defended at those times when its powers have been seen to be under threat as those backing reforms are finding. The tradition of being "tried by a jury of one's peers" probably has its origins in Anglo Saxon custom, which dictated that an accused man could be acquitted if enough people came forward to swear his innocence.

    Read More

  • Importance Of Jury Selection

    2734 Words  | 6 Pages

    The book Acquittal by Richard Gabriel states, “juries are the best judges in the system. They are not elected, they don't have the high-powered microscope of appellate review or the stern, disapproving-schoolmarm precedent looking over their shoulder, and they have no interest in the outcome of the case.” For this reason, we can come to the conclusion that the use of juries in a trial is the best for all involved in the legal system. While juries, “are the best judges in the system”, lawyers, jury consultants, and jury scientists are the reasons they are viewed this way. It is their job to make sure that not only their client, but everyone has a fair and unbiased trial.Making sure that “the best judges in the system” are fair and unbiased takes a lot of planning, research, and effort. You must research the jurors, understand how they think, what their morals are, and how they would view this case. “It is a constructed reality, cobbled together by shifting memories of witnesses, attorney arguments, legal instructions, personal experiences, and beliefs of jurors.”(Gabriel

    Read More

  • Jury System Dbq Essay

    679 Words  | 2 Pages

    Is the jury system a good idea? Many will say yes, and a few like myself will say no. At first I believed, yes a jury system is a good idea, it’s lasted us this long so why should there be any changes to it. Then I read this DBQ and it changed my mind. So first of all, most jurors are non-reliable, a lot of them can be biased and not even care or pay attention to the case they are assigned to, and lastly we have living proof on why we should get rid of a jury, and that is the Casey Anthony case.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Jury System In 12 Angry Men By Sidney Lumet

    1175 Words  | 3 Pages

    Mention the pros and cons of our jury system and possible alternatives of it. Also, identify the group dynamics of the jury members

    Read More

  • Reflection Paper On Court Experience

    1482 Words  | 3 Pages

    The judge was a middle-aged male who looked intimidating and seemed to be well respected. To my surprise, we did not have to stand up when he entered the room. After the judge came out I assumed the jury would follow quickly after. However I quickly learned that there would be no jury for this particular trial. After a few minutes, the handcuffed defendant entered the room wearing an orange prison jumpsuit. He was a middle-aged, African-American male who was involved in a narcotic conspiracy case. In addition to the defendant a probation officer, the prosecutor and the defendant’s lawyer were also present. Aside from me, my classmate and a student from Georgetown the defendant’s wife and sister were in the

    Read More

More about Pros and Cons of Sequestering Trial Juries

Open Document