Trial by jury. Should the jury system be abolished?
Juries have the ability to find individuals not guilty when they think the law is wrong or that the punishment would be unfair. The right to a fair trial and judgement by a jury of your peers (your peers, not a single individual above you or them) is one of the cornerstones of most modern legal systems in most modern democracies.
Should juries be abolished in the UK? From conception in the Magna Carta 1215, juries have become a sacred constitutional right in the UK’s justice system, with the independence of the jury from the judge established in the R v. Bushel’s case 1670. Although viewed by some as a bothersome and an.
It should be abolished for all criminal trials’. Trial by jury has been regarded as a paradigm of English criminal law, described as a bulwark against oppression, a safeguard of our liberties since the common sense of the ordinary person prevails when all else fails.
Should the jury system be abolished? A jury is a sworn body of people convened to deliver an impartial verdict. A jury is a sworn body of people convened to deliver an impartial verdict. Juries are composed of jurors, who are by definition layman finders of fact, not professionals.
However, to conclude that the jury system must be abolished because citizens might be tainted by rape myths is to miss the point entirely. Rape myths need to be excised from the jury box.
Hence, juries should be capable of tracking the evidence and reaching the correct decision. Juries regularly are deemed to be victims of skillful lawyers. Decent barristers could convince juries to go along with their impressive presentations and give decisions for what they want.
As the principle of random selection lies at the heart of the jury system, so the jurors are not generally selected on the basis of gender or ethnic origin. Lord Justice Auld, in his 2001 review, recommended that in racially sensitive cases there should be modified selection procedure to ensure that up to three ethnic minority jurors were chosen.
This essay will be discussing the jury system and whether it should be abolished from the English Legal System. The jury system is viewed as one of the most fundamental parts of the English Legal System, however in practice it is only in a minority of cases.
As demonstrated in the Michael Brown and Eric Garner cases, today’s state criminal grand juries serve no useful purpose and make a mockery of justice; they should be abolished. There is nothing.
The categories of ineligibility should be abolished and replaced by a system that uses discretion to excuse or defer service for individuals. The considerations for excusing jury service should include whether it would be in the public interest to excuse someone on account of their work.
The anti jury lobby deems the jury system unpopular the importance of which is considered only overrated. I will be critically analysing whether trial by jury should be abolished in the UK legal system plus evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of the system.
Juries should be abolished in rape cases because they are biased against victims, says the lawyer who represented two women attacked by John Worboys. Harriet Wistrich told Legal Action: 'If you.
American jury system could be very helpful, as well as cause damage because of making wrong decisions in serious cases. Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on Is the America Jury System still a Good Idea?
