Jury Should Be Abolished Essay

894 Words4 Pages

If the US does consider abolishing the trial by jury and permanently replace it with trial by the bench, then it would be best to get the opinion of the citizens first before taking action. Some citizens may have some idea what the difference is between trial by jury and trial by the bench and some don’t, so it would be best to inform them of its differences. A trial by jury consists of twelve people from the community, the job of the jury is the come to a decision if the witness is found to be guilty or innocent and the judge decides the law. But for the verdict to be decided all twelve jurors must agree on the same decision, and if only one still does not believe the witness to be guilty or innocent then the other jurors must have to convince …show more content…

In the article of Connect US “… prosecutors and defendants to have limited removal power over the formation of the jury so that it can seem fair to both sides in the case.”(Chief, Editor) This makes it where both parties have some leeway to either stay with the chosen jury or replace someone if they feel that it will be biased for one side. Also having a trial by jury highly eliminates bias because of the twelve people, which makes it harder if a jury to make everyone vote guilty or not guilty. It’s important to know someone’s background and what condition they are in before being given an important task such as jury duty since they are contributing to either putting someone behind the bar or releasing them back to society, in the article Connect US, “…Judges and lawyers have the opportunity to question each one to see if they can be fair and impartial.” If it seems like a jury may have something against the witness then they shall be removed because they are deemed not suited for this situation. Knowing this it seems better to have a trial by jury rather than taking a trial by a judge who takes both roles and which the prosecutor only needs to convince one person that the witness is

Open Document