Jury System Dbq Analysis

Over the years, jury systems have precedent the way we reach a verdict based on the trial. Moreover, it has been proven that jury systems have shaped Americans to be self-governors (Document B). Evidence shows that in a twelve month period bench trials have only 65 percent of criminals that have been convicted and 87 percent of criminals have been convicted in jury trials (Document A). This proves that jury systems are able to prosecute more and deliver more justice than bench trials. To begin, I support jury systems based on open minded peers reaching a verdict, prevention of corruption, and civic participation/knowledge for citizens. Specifically, jury systems are a good idea because your peers will have an open mind which will allow them …show more content…
You can, however, say that some of the jury would not be paying attention which could impact the trial but, a jury is made up of more than a couple of people. It is possible that a small portion of the jury would be listening to come up with a decision. This decision would either be the majority of the votes or the same decision would be chosen by people who were not paying attention to agree with the vast majority (Document D, Cartoon1). To continue, another reason for being in favor of jury systems is it prevents corruptions. In bench trials anyone can bribe the judge in order for them to win the case, but in jury trials you will not know who the people are until you show up in court. In addition, sometimes people that are involved in the case can be famous or well known. This could lead to threats because if the person is really powerful, he/she would threaten the judge. If it was a jury, it would be hard to threaten because you will not know who the citizens are in the jury until you walk into the court room. For example, Zenger printed a newspaper critical of the British