‘Are Juries the "Fairest” of Them All?’
1. SUMMARY
This essay shall first approach the notion regarding the significance of trust in the jury and its function, and how this perception has generally been maintained and viewed by society so far. The essay will then briefly discuss the history and role of the jury for foundational knowledge before transitioning towards a further examination of the significance of trust in relation to the role of the jury. Hence, tallying to the essay’s main task, which is to critically evaluate: a) situations where a juror’s conduct may affect their reputation of being fair, which could result in a miscarriage of justice; and b) the efficacy of safety measures in managing such actions. To draw the essay …show more content…
Jurors, as the title implies, originally acted as witnesses during the Middle Ages, compelled by the king to take an oath for the purpose of providing information about domestic matters. Thus, in those days, the jury consisted of a body of men used in inquests to settle civil disputes concerning the ownership and tenancy of land. The jury would then present their evidence, but the final decision was ultimately left to the king or his ministers. Fundamentally, this form of local inquiry was mostly used for administrative purposes, such as gathering information for the Domesday Book …show more content…
This argument may be supported by the fact that juries are usually impartial, as they are not intended to be associated with anyone in a case. Moreover, juries are randomly selected and more often than not, result in a cross-section of society. Thus, this should result in an impartial jury as they will have dissimilar preconceived ideas to cancel out each other’s biases. Additional elements that contribute to ensuring a fair trial are implementations of procedural safeguards, such as jury vetting, jury qualifications and et cetera.
Secondly, trial by jury is one of the most democratic aspects of the constitution by allowing the public to have a say in the criminal justice system frequently and not just once every four or five years. This is beneficial to society as juries are able to bring to the table insights and freshness, which have not become case-hardened and cynical. Moreover, juries are neither gullible when they are faced with incongruous statements given by witnesses to determine the truth. As a whole, the right to be tried by one’s peers is a fortress of independence against the
1. SUMMARY
This essay shall first approach the notion regarding the significance of trust in the jury and its function, and how this perception has generally been maintained and viewed by society so far. The essay will then briefly discuss the history and role of the jury for foundational knowledge before transitioning towards a further examination of the significance of trust in relation to the role of the jury. Hence, tallying to the essay’s main task, which is to critically evaluate: a) situations where a juror’s conduct may affect their reputation of being fair, which could result in a miscarriage of justice; and b) the efficacy of safety measures in managing such actions. To draw the essay …show more content…
Jurors, as the title implies, originally acted as witnesses during the Middle Ages, compelled by the king to take an oath for the purpose of providing information about domestic matters. Thus, in those days, the jury consisted of a body of men used in inquests to settle civil disputes concerning the ownership and tenancy of land. The jury would then present their evidence, but the final decision was ultimately left to the king or his ministers. Fundamentally, this form of local inquiry was mostly used for administrative purposes, such as gathering information for the Domesday Book …show more content…
This argument may be supported by the fact that juries are usually impartial, as they are not intended to be associated with anyone in a case. Moreover, juries are randomly selected and more often than not, result in a cross-section of society. Thus, this should result in an impartial jury as they will have dissimilar preconceived ideas to cancel out each other’s biases. Additional elements that contribute to ensuring a fair trial are implementations of procedural safeguards, such as jury vetting, jury qualifications and et cetera.
Secondly, trial by jury is one of the most democratic aspects of the constitution by allowing the public to have a say in the criminal justice system frequently and not just once every four or five years. This is beneficial to society as juries are able to bring to the table insights and freshness, which have not become case-hardened and cynical. Moreover, juries are neither gullible when they are faced with incongruous statements given by witnesses to determine the truth. As a whole, the right to be tried by one’s peers is a fortress of independence against the