Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Judiciary and its working essay
Role of judiciary
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Have you ever received the “dreaded” jury summons? If you have then you are more than likely familiar with the process. However, if you have not ever received a jury summons or been selected for jury duty allow me to explain it. A jury summons is the notification that is sent to randomly selected individuals of the community making them aware that they are to appear for jury duty or jury selection. The notification will indicate the date and time in which the individual is to appear. While it is understood that jury duty or jury selection could be a bit “inconvenient” for some individuals it is actually one of the most civic duties you can perform. There are two main types of juries within the federal trial courts: trial juries which are also known as petit juries and grand juries (“Types of juries”, 2017). This paper seeks to provide insight and explain the purpose, functions, and powers of the grand jury. …show more content…
Petit juries consist of 6 to 12 citizens and together they decide if the defendant committed the crime as charged in a criminal case based on the facts of the case and are generally public with private pondering.
In contrast, grand juries are larger than petit juries and consist of 16 to 23 citizens. The purpose of a grand jury is to determine if there is probable cause to believe the individual has committed a crime and should proceed to trial (“Types of juries”, 2017) and are not public. In accordance with the Fifth Amendment, no individual shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise notorious crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury and is assured for certain offenses (Worrall,
2017). The grand jury performs significant investigative functions and is very influential in terms of being able to subpoena witnesses and documents. As mentioned before grand jury proceedings are not generally open to the public and are in fact very much undisclosed. Several reasons for this were given in landmark case United States v. Rose (215 F. 2d 617 [1954]). The reasons for such secrecy are as follows: (1) to put a stop to the escape of those whose outcome may be contemplated; (2) to insure the highest sovereignty to the grand jury in its pondering, and to stop the defendant or their friends/family from interfering; (3) to prevent perjury or tampering with witnesses; (4) to encourage free and untrammeled disclosures; and (5) to protect the innocent accused (Worrall, 2017). Along with the investigative functions of the grand jury come investigative powers. For instance in United States v. Calandra (414 U.S. 338 [1974]) it was held that a grand jury may require the production of evidence or the statement of a witness as it considers suitable (Worrall, 2017). In most cases the grand jury will subpoena the witness or evidence. There are two types of subpoenas: one requires a person to appear and the other requires that the documents/evidence be provided. The grand jury can also offer grants of immunity to individuals in return for their statement or testimony. ). In the state of Florida the grand jury indictment is only required in capital or life imprisonment cases (Worrall, 2017).
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...
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.
This chapter is mainly devoted to the jury selection process and how it is taken care
What the Grand Jury does is rather simple, but a very necessary feature of the American court process. The purpose of the Grand Jury is “to determine whether there is enough evidence for the case to proceed to trial” (Miller, 2015). It makes perfect sense as to why the director of the film did not include this process, due to the fact that during the Grand Jury process, all of the evidence against the defendants gets presented to the judge (Miller, 2015). If the director were to present this as a scene in the movie, there would be no surprise as to what the prosecutor would produce as evidence, which for the film, would make it less suspenseful. This leads us into the next step, and that is the Discovery Process. In the movie, Vinny believes that he seduced Jim Trotter to give him his files on the case. Vinny was surprised at how easily he received the documents,until his fiancé (Mona Lisa Vito) tells him that the prosecutor had to share them with him, and this is part of the discovery process. The prosecution is legally bound to share its information with the defense.
Mention the pros and cons of our jury system and possible alternatives of it. Also, identify the group dynamics of the jury members
Smith, William (1997) “Useful or Just Plain Unfair? The Debate Over Peremptories; Lawyers, Judges Spllit Over the Value of Jury Selection Method” The Legal Intelligencer, April 23: pg 1.
First, when individuals are appointed for a jury, several individuals will do anything to not be selected for the trial. For instance, my father has conveyed he was indisposed or he could not afford to miss work. Moreover, most individuals do not perceive being a juror as an honor being as a citizen, instead they see it as a burden. A substantial influence on this position is the remuneration, because individuals are missing work to serve. On average, an individual who is selected to be a juror makes about 30 to 40 dollars a day, a fraction of when he or she is working. For this
At trial, your life is in the palms of strangers who decide your fate to walk free or be sentenced and charged with a crime. Juries and judges are the main components of trials and differ at both the state and federal level. A respectable citizen selected for jury duty can determine whether the evidence presented was doubtfully valid enough to convict someone without full knowledge of the criminal justice system or the elements of a trial. In this paper, juries and their powers will be analyzed, relevant cases pertaining to jury nullification will be expanded and evaluated, the media’s part on juries discretion, and finally the instructions judges give or may not include for juries in the court. Introduction Juries are a vital object to the legal system and are prioritized as the most democratic element in our society, aside from voting, in our society today.
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’.
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
A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.
This is the sixth amendment and this tells you about what juries can do in cases of law. “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” What all of this means is that everyone that gets convicted of a crime gets all of the same benefits weather its a misdemeanor, felony, or capital crime. Everyone get the rights to a speedy trial and an impartial jury.
They are the impartial third-party whose responsibility is to deliver a verdict for the accused based on the evidence presented during trial. They balance the rights of society to a great extent as members of the community are involved. This links the legal system with the community and ensures that the system is operating fairly and reflecting the standards and values of society. A trial by jury also ensures the victim’s rights to a fair trial. However, they do not balance the rights of the offender as they can be biased or not under. In the News.com.au article ‘Judge or jury? Your life depends on this decision’ (14 November 2013), Ian Lloyd, QC, revealed that “juries are swayed by many different factors.” These factors include race, ethnicity, physical appearance and religious beliefs. A recent study also found that juries are influenced by where the accused sits in the courtroom. They found that a jury is most likely to give a “guilty” verdict if the accused sits behind a glass dock (ABC News, 5 November 2014). Juries also tend to be influenced by their emotions; hence preventing them from having an objective view. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘Court verdicts: More found innocent if no jury involved’ (23 November 2013), 55.4 per cent of defendants in judge-alone trials were acquitted of all charges compared with 29 per cent in jury trials between 1993 and 2011. Professor Mark Findlay from the University of Sydney said that this is because “judges were less likely to be guided by their emotions.” Juries balance the rights of victims and society to a great extent. However, they are ineffective in balancing the rights of the offender as juries can be biased which violate the offender’s rights to have a fair
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
There is no greater example of government “of the people, by the people, for the people” than the right of trial by jury. The jury is a slice of The People—not mere representatives of The People, but literally The People—whose vital role was to be the ultimate finder of fact and of law. We agree that the right to