2 Question After reading about juries and trials in chapter 12 of your text, offer your ideas for improving the jury trial procedure in the United States.
2
Question
After reading about juries and trials in chapter 12 of your text, offer your ideas for improving the jury trial procedure in the United States. For example, do you believe there are ways to promote more objective decision-making by juries
Reply 1
The trial by jury is supposed to be done by a jury of peers. First there is a jury pool (or venire). Next there is the voir dire (“to speak the truth”). This is where the attorneys for both sides of the case examine the pool of jurors and make appointments. There can be challenges from either side for the appointment of a particular juror. In some cases, the trial is by a jury of 12 jurors and others by a jury of 6 jurors. A verdict doesn’t need to be unanimous for a conviction unless there is a pool of only 6 jurors (Neubauer, 2013). I believe there are ways to promote more objective decision-making by juries. I think there are ways to improve the jury trial procedure in the United States. It is every United States citizen’s responsibility to help represent the community. The Jury Act 1977 should be amended to provide that where a judge is satisfied that the impact of prejudicial information disclosed during a trial is such that the accused person may not have a fair trial, the judge has the power to allow, where the parties consent, the trial to continue after the disclosure of such information on the basis that if the jury returns a verdict of guilty, the trial should be regarded as a nullity. the verdict set aside, and a retrial ordered. Unless the court orders otherwise, any re-orting of the order declaring that this procedure shall apply should be prohibited. I think there should always be an equal representation for minorities as well as an equal male to female ratio. The representation of women in United States juries has increased during the last hundred years, due to legislation and court rulings. Up until the late twentieth century, women were routinely excluded or allowed to opt out from jury service. The push for women’s jury rights generated debate like the women’s suffrage movement, permeating the media with arguments for and against. Federal and state court case rulings increased women’s participation on juries. Some states allowed women to serve on juries much earlier than others. States also differed on whether women’s suffrage implied women’s jury service.
Judicial Process: Laws, Courts, and Politics in the United States. By David W. Neubauer, Stephen S. Meinhold. 2013
Reply 2
The jury is selected from a pool of people who are part of the community. They are selected by the attorneys from both sides of a case. They go through and choose the one they feel are the best for the case. They can have appointments and other meetings with jury members to see if they are the right juror for the trial. There can be twelve jurors, but some cases only have six jurors. Something I feel that could be changed that could improve a jury trial would be education. I am not saying that they all should be college graduates, but I feel that they should at least have a high school education to be a juror or a GED. This could help the people who are selected as the jury to have a better understanding of the trial. I feel if the community has a large number of minorities, then there also should be a big selection of minorities in the juror pool. They are supposed to be people from the community, and it should show with the jury. Another thing I would change would be a requirement that there are an even amount of female and males on a jury. These would be the changes I would make to make a jury trials procedures improve.
Question 2
Discuss the methods of preventing prejudicial pretrial publicity. Are there recent examples of celebrated cases where prejudicial pretrial publicity was a threat to the fair trial guarantee? What actions were taken to prevent this?
Reply 1
Pre -trial publicity can be detrimental to the outcome of criminal cases. I believe this could be avoided after securing an impartial jury involving cases that are high profile.
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. It has been most visibly tested in a series of cases involving terrorism, but much more often figures in cases that involve (for example) jury selection or the protection of witnesses, including victims of sex crimes as well as witnesses in need of protection from retaliation.
One case that comes to mind is the O.J Simpson case. The televised OJ Simpson trial of the late nineties made a huge impact in North American culture. OJ Simpson, a beloved football star and celebrity at the time, was charged with the murders of his wife Nicole Brown Simpson, and her friend Ronald Goldman and what followed was a drawn out and complex trial that captured the public’s attention. It was a fascinating case that went far beyond facts, and physical evidence. The case had a heavy influence on the way that news was communicated to the masses. The trial is one of the most watched television events ever. It was an event that everyone had an opinion on, and constant televised updates made it impossible to ignore. The OJ Simpson murder trial, and the rise of the 24-hour news cycle both occurred in the same relatively short period of time in history. One could argue that the circumstances of the dramatic trial created demand for the 24-hour news cycle, and was vital in its growth as a communication medium. In addition to the trial influencing the news, the way the news was being communicated at the time, influenced the way the public viewed the trial, and perhaps even impacted the final verdict
Reply 2
Prejudicial pretrial publicity is when the defendant’s have reduced chances of a trial because information is released by the media before the trial (Neubauer). If a jury sees prejudicial coverage about a case beforehand, they will most likely have biased opinions of the defendant. The constitution guarantees that any person has the right to a fair trial (Neubauer). There are three techniques that, in a way, help prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity. These three techniques consist of, limited gag order, change of venue, and sequestering of the jury. First, limited gag order makes sure that any person that has any direct involvement in the case must not talk to the media or they could be punished. Unfortunately, when news reporters get their information, they do not tell who gave them their information. Next, change of venue is if a case is getting too much media attention the courthouse where it is being held can be moved. This does not happen often because prosecutors want the trial to stay more local. Lastly, sequestering the Jury is where the people of the jury are put in hotel rooms, and they are monitored so that they do not see coverage of the trial from the media. This is hard because they will have to find people who are okay with being away for a long time and can go without working.
I am sure that a lot of us have heard of the case of Steven Avery. Prejudicial pretrial publicity had a very big impact on this case. In 2005 Avery and his nephew Bobby Dassey were accused of murdering a lady named Teresa Halbach while she was on their property to photograph a car for a magazine. This case gained a lot of publicity and even quickly got a Netflix docuseries. I remember keeping up with this case and watching the Netflix show. To me it seemed as if the media automatically jumped to the conclusion that Avery was guilty and wanted everyone to feel the same way. They made sure to let everyone know Avery’s passed crimes he committed, even serving 18 years for rape. The docuseries highlighted important evidence to try and show that Avery must be guilty. For me, it made me feel like he was really innocent. I do not believe that they did anything to prevent prejudicial pretrial publicity.
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
