Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Racial discrimination in the justice system
Racial discrimination in the justice system
Injustice in the justice system
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Racial discrimination in the justice system
In the book "live from death row" by Mumia Abu Jamal in the section "jury of peers?" (98-99) The quote stated by Justice Blackmun "there is reason to believe that his trial and sentencing proceedings were infected with racial prejudice" meaning the Dissenting Justice Blackmun voted not to execute William Henry Hance due to a statement on what a juror had said on hearing racial slurs. This case was basically infected from the start on the evidence of the case. The purpose of this section of reading was to analysis the meaning of what "Jury of peers" is, where in a case jury of ones peers(equal) include a wide of different race, gender, etc. and to ensure that the jury had no previous knowledge relevance to the case. In William Henry case the
The details disclosed that the prosecution highlighted the names of the potential black judges and tinted every black potential juror’s name in a different color. There were four different duplicates of the record of all of the individuals summoned for the task in the case. Evert record had a key, which indicated that the highlighted names represented the blacks. Besides, there were no any blotches made for the white jurors on the lists. There were also many marks made on the black people’s names on the juror questionnaires, and there was no any other race that was
Gaines’ novel is centered on a massive injustice, which is a young man who is falsely convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death by electrocution. When Jefferson was brought into a trial for the murders of the three white men in the bar, most of the jury quickly assumed that he was guilty due to his skin color, because, at that time, the assumption of innocence does not
.guilty. . .guilty. . .guilty. . .” (211). By using only four guilty’s, Lee is able to demonstrate that the word of two white people has a greater effect than that of an African American even though the man who was put up for his life had not harmed, nor had he ever damaged anything he came into contact with.
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
Juror #10, a garage owner, segregates and divides the world stereotypically into ‘us’ and ‘them.’ ‘Us’ being people living around the rich or middle-class areas, and ‘them’ being people of a different race, or possessing a contrasting skin color, born and raised in the slums (poorer parts of town). It is because of this that he has a bias against the young man on trial, for the young man was born in the slums and was victim to domestic violence since the age of 5. Also, the boy is of a Hispanic descent and is of a different race than this juror, making him fall under the juror’s discriminatory description of a criminal. This is proven on when juror #10 rants: “They don’t need any real big reason to kill someone, either. You know, they get drunk, and bang, someone’s lying in the gutter… most of them, it’s like they have no feelings (59).
In conclusion, we have seen that the race of the victim and the emotionality of the victim impact statements highly affects the jury’s empathy and therefore might influence their decision making. Understanding the interaction between the racial in-group/out-group and empathy may allow defense attorneys to lead jurors for harsher punishments for out-group racial groups and more lenient punishments for in-groups by playing on juror empathy and thus putting emotions before law and reason. Consequently, in any capital punishment case, race of the victim and race of the jury, could be the difference between life and death for a defendant and therefore needs to be studied further.
A classic case of race. Trayvon Martin, a young black teen, walked down the street one afternoon with a bottle of tea and a pack of skittles, before encountering a man of a different ethnic background- George Zimmerman. That tragic day was the last one Mr. Martin would ever see and it brings about the question, “Is his death justified by law?” Some may argue Zimmerman acted out of self-defense. Still others say a boy lost his life due to acts of racism. Sounds similar to the case mentioned in Twelve Angry Men, does it not? Jurors in that story were ready to send someone to their grave because of their color. In all honesty though, when the judicial system is served correctly, justice will be dished out no matter if an individual is black, white, blue, or yellow. Throughout the Zimmerman trial and the case told in Twelve Angry Men only one verdict could be reached based on evidence. Due to a plethora of personalities, one can conclude that coming to a ruling was not an easy task for either jury.
The jury’s decision, however, was not based on evidence, but on race. A jury is supposed to put their beliefs aside and make a decision based on the information given during the trial. Jury members must do their duty and do what is right. I tried to do what was right, but all the other members of the jury were blind. They chose to convict because of skin color rather than actual evidence from the case.
"The Species of the World. " Racial prejudice, Jury Empathy and sentencing in death penalty cases. New York, New York: LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. Mohammed, K. G. (07/2010).
The crowded courtroom was absolutely silent as the 12 all white and all men took their seats at the jury box. Chief Justice Albert Mason, one of the presiding judges in the murder case, asked Charles I. Richards, the foreman, to rise. Mr. Richards was asked to read the verdict. “Not guilty”, replied the foreman. Even though the circumstantial and physical evidence pointed to Lizzie Borden guilty of killing her step-mother and father, the all-male jury, men of some financial means, could not fathom that a woman who is well bred and a Sunday school teacher could possibly do such a heinous crime (Linder 7).
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.
Have you ever heard of a jury system? The jury system was created in the 1400,s. This so called jury system was to help trails make a decision during a case. The jury picks 12 ordinary people to help on a task. There only two reasons why people might support trial by jury 1 is that they get a better understanding or a better view point. The system came from great britain. they‘re terms in the jury such as pool-eligible citizen who summons to serve as jurors. Acquitted - which the person can't be tried for the same crime. Verdict - the decision. The task is to ask whether the jury works as well now as it did now can 12 ordinary people really make the best decision.
Hundreds of years ago, the jury system arose in England. A ruler named King George soon took away the right for people to have a trial by jury, which is ordinary citizens drawn to help decide a case based on presented evidence. This made many Americans angry and upset for what he had taken from them. The US Constitution guaranteed the right to have trial by jury, which the founders made sure of that and also is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. It was listed in the Declaration of Independence as a reason for the American colonist to separate from Great Britain. Having jury duty helps serve as a responsibility for the American citizens to help repay the government for the things they do and protection they provide. Even though this is a good
The film A Jury of her Peers, is similar to the play, Trifles because it highlights similar points that are referenced in the text and is clear it was used as a basis for the foundation of the film. The names of Mr. and Mrs. Wright are changed to Mr. and Mrs. Burke. The use of facts to outline the climax, are the same as used in the play. Such as the building of suspense of the discovering of the bird and its strangulation and whether Mrs. Burke or Mr. Burke is to place blame. However, as an adaptation, opinions are added into the original framework of the play to add a touch of personalization. The film interprets the drama as a murder mystery, as the attorney and the sheriff search the household to find evidence to place blame on Mrs. Burke. A jury of her Peers, works to portray the emotions of Mrs. Peters and Mrs. Hale, as they discover items that would, (if found by the men) possibly prove her guilty (Bourne, 2013).
Jury Selection is the first stage of a trial. The people that are part of the jury panel are selected from previous records like tax records. The jury panel is also called the venire. To keep the case unbiased, or the voir dire, people that are family members or friends could not be a juror.