The Jury System

Book Overview

No Synopsis Available.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1565105400
• ISBN13: 9781565105409
• Release Date: January 1997
• Publisher: Greenhaven Press
• Length: 80 Pages
• Weight: 0.60 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.4" x 6.2" x 9.2"
• Age Range: 10 to 17 years
• Grade Range: Grades 5 to 12

Customer Reviews

Fair, blunt, readable, fascinating

Opposing viewpoints on the functioning of the American jury system are explored in this slender book--80 pages in all, including an index. Anyone who has served on a jury or who has interacted with a jury should find this book quite interesting. The book begins with an overview of our jury system, followed by several sets of pro- and con- arguments on important issues related to juries: * Trial by Jury should be abolished/retained * The Majority verdict should be adopted/The unanimous verdict should be retained * Peremptory challenges should be abolished/retained * Juries should be informed of their right to nullify the law/Jury nullification should not be allowed * Selected racially based nullification can create justice/Racially based jury nullification is not just I've served on five juries (two armed robberies, one murder, and two civil cases) and have strong opinions on the first three sets of arguments, i.e. retain trial by jury (from my experience, it seems to work quite well); a unanimous verdict should be required for criminal trials (the jurors are forced to thoroughly debate the results from the trial--I was a minority of one twice; we went over and over the facts until in one case, I was convinced to vote with the majority, and in the other trial, the rest of the jurors changed their minds and voted with me); and peremptory challenges should be abolished (I was actually called up for jury duty over a dozen times, but once the lawyers discovered I'd been on five juries, one of them would use a peremptory challenge to remove me from the jury during the voir dire process. I'd still get called up for jury duty, but I never served on another jury, which seemed like a big waste of my time). The jury nullification issue did not ever come up during my jury service, which is to say the judge never brought it up. Basically it means that "throughout U.S. history, juries have had the [constitutional] right to express their disapproval of unreasonable laws by acquitting guilty defendants." However, most juries (maybe all juries) are no longer informed of their right to nullify. According to the author of the pro-nullification argument, juries have not been told they have the power to judge the law itself, since the late 1800s. On the other hand, the author who believes that jury nullification should not be allowed argues that "the jury is not an appropriate place for activist resistance...jurors must apply the law despite any moral or political objections they might have." The jury nullification issue with regard to racism is given an airing in the last two chapters. One of the cases occurred within the court system where I served as juror: "In 1994, a suburban white woman named Rebecca Gordon was driving through Detroit when she was gunned down by a group of blacks in an adjoining car. Defense counsel played the 'race card' at the 1995 trial, and the inner city jury refused to convict defendant Brian Marable of murder, turning in a