Dbq Essay On The Jury System

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

the better choice is clearly the jury system because it works, it gets the community together to serve in the judicial branch, and it is the most fair.
The jury system has been around for centuries and in our government has worked in most instances, which proves that there is no reason to get rid of something that works.

In the Jury system mini Q document A, the second chart shows that in around 2300 jury trials only around 300 people are Acquitted, while in Bench trials about a third of the people are acquitted. This shows that the jury system works a far larger percentage of the time while the bench trial lets a lot of people go. In the Jury system mini Q document C, John Gastil says “the framers of the United states Constitution viewed the jury system as a critically important feature.” This shows that the framers had originally intended for there to be a trial by jury for every case in order for democracy to shine through and be the leading form of government that our country

uses.
The jury system has stood the test of time and has proven to be effective. But another factor that many overlook is the fact that people get involved in government because of the jury system. Whether or not people enjoy jury’s it still keeps people up to date on how our country is run and prevents people from being ignorant to the justice system. In the Jury system mini Q document C Phil Weiser writes that “observers of the American jury system have remarked on its ability to elevate ordinary citizens into self governors.” This shows that the ability to self govern is an important thing to have in a democratic society and should be preserved. In the Jury system mini Q document C Phil Weiser also says “In theory elections play similar roles in making sure the people have ultimate control over the legislative and executive branches.” What this is saying is that with the jury system, people are allowed to have some form of say in every branch of government, which is exactly how it was intended to be. Finally in the Jury system mini Q document E, each illustration shows ordinary people on a jury thinking different things, and the pictures are insulting the intelligence of the American people. However the people are definitely much smarter than this and should usually be able to make clear decisions. Clearly cases in the past have had issues with this but for the most part it is fine.
Lastly the jury system is the fairest way of having a trial be completed.

While having a judge may seem like it is more effective, while calculating time spent on the case, money used, and the education in the field of justice that a judge has, using a trial by jury is the best way to preserve the American ideal of democracy. In the Jury system mini Q document F, Mark twin mentions that the jury system doesn’t want educated people because they would make the trial too easy for one side. Rather than insulting the jury system it seems like this is more of a good thing because it shows that the jury system doesn’t want people who know too much about the subject already and could sway the decision based solely on their bias. Another way that the system is fair is the fact that rather than having one judge decide the fate of a person, rather it is 12 other citizens that have no ties to the person. In the Jury system mini Q document B The letter states “a reasoned and professional judgment should be replaced by blanket verdicts or pretty well any twelve men and women … I had taken my leave of sense.” While this man is insulting the jury system what he says should still be looked at. The people that come together for a jury will have much less bias towards the accused person that a judge who has either seen the person before, or could just not be looking at it with multiple points of

view.
While the other side of the argument states that it is costly to have multiple members come together for long periods of time. Or it is illogical to have unqualified members of society decide someone’s fate rather than a seasoned judge who has studied and seen this often. The jury system still trumps these ideas because of 3 very deciding factors. It works, it brings the community into the justice system, and it is by far the fairest way of going about deciding someone’s fate.