Why Trial by Jury Should Be Retained Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Why Trial by Jury Should Be Retained - Essay Example It is though this confidence that citizens appreciate the independence and the important role played by the judicial system. Trial through a jury has been a long tradition in the justice system that it is considered as unique approach in the justice system in that it requires the use of ordinary citizens without prior legal training to hear evidence in a court of law, make sense of the conflicting facts and the application of legal rules to reach a final verdict about which all or the majority of jurors can agree. Thousands of cases are heard and determined by juries annually and prediction regarding the potential verdicts has a large influence on the decisions required to settle civil lawsuits and in offering and accepting plea bargains in most criminal cases. Jury trials have therefore an important role to play in the law. It is through these juries that psychologists can better perceive how individuals perceive, interpret and remember evidence and the various ways in which the jur or members can establish consensus with one another. Largely, the use of these juries in trials is mainly observed as giving the public the power and entrusting them to govern themselves in that the members are just ordinary public with no prior training in law. Most western countries through this have undertaken to use juries in both criminal and civil cases. Does it mean that judges are not entrusted to pass out credible verdicts? Not really. Jurors are just intended to ensure that the trial has the view and acceptance of the ordinary man. ii. Facts and statistics on juries In 2005, about 16,397 tort cases were disposed by jury or bench with the jury hearing 90% of these cases. 80% of all jury trails globally takes place in the US 70% of Japanese citizens reluctant to serve in the jury In 2009, there were six verdicts over $1,000,000 in the US in medical malpractices with largest being at $23.6 million settled after trail (Day, 2010). iii. Objectives of the review This review has several objectives which are; Evaluating the importance of a jury Understanding how a jury operates Recommending the retention of juries in corridors of justice. iv. How jurors operate. Jurors in most cases do a good job in weighing the evidence provided and applying the law in passing out the verdict of an accused (Greene & Bornstein, 2000). Usually, where jurors are considered to have erred, there is evidence that the errors reflect well documented and universal psychological principles that may include heuristic reasoning and attribution errors (Greene & Bornstein, 2011). This may aid in watering down the numerous criticism along with extensive media coverage that portray sensitive cases that have been used to portray the jury as being incompetent and resulting to wrong judgments especially in criminal cases. These errors occurring within the acceptable and recognized psychological principles explain the overall usefulness of these juries in civil and criminal cases and further e xplain that there is an importance of retaining them in the corridors of justice. The lack of fairness in the court system may be attributed to: System not offering required protection to citizens form harm by bringing offenders to the required justice Proceedings in the court system being lengthy Outcome of sentences portraying a disconnection between the crime committed and the senesce handed to offenders (Falconer, 2006) Juries in most cases ensure that judges entrust fairness and preserve the issue of subjective decision making in convicting persons in a court of law (Lea, 2006). The role of jury is to weigh the evidence this is presented in court, apply the law as directed by the trial judge regarding the