Majority verdicts are a means to reach an agreed verdict by allowing the jury to have eleven to one votes or in the case of a smaller trial, ten to one. There is a lot of controversy about majority verdicts and whether they are an improvement or a diminishment of the original unanimous verdict. Samuel Brownback is an American Politician who believes that our legal system needs to be improved and reformed; one such method of improvement is majority verdicts. Although majority verdicts can sometimes result in an incorrect sentence, its benefits are more beneficial with some benefits being; fewer mistrials occurring, less impact from rogue or stealth jurors and avoid having jurors bribed or intimidated. Majority verdicts are when all but one juror
With millions of criminal convictions a year, more than two million people may end up behind bars(Gross). According to Samuel Gross reporter for The Washington Post, writes that also “even one percent amounts to tens of thousands of tragic [wrongful conviction] errors”(Gross). Citizens who are wrongfully convicted are incarcerated for a crime he or she did not commit. Many police officers, prosecutors, and judges are responsible for the verdict that puts innocents into prison. To be able to get exonerated many wait over a decade just to get there case looked at, not many are able to have the opportunity of getting out. People plead guilty for crimes that are not committed by them to avoid trial, but by doing so the right decision wasn’t made.
A plea bargain is an agreement between the prosecutor and the defendant in a criminal case. The prosecutor gives the defendant the opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge or to the original charge with less than the maximum sentence. For example, the prosecution and the defense may agree to a misdemeanor charge instead of a felony charge or the parties may agree to a sentence of 12 years instead of 20 years if the recommended sentence for that crime is 10-20 years imprisonment.
The concept of an innocent man pleading guilty was far fetched in 19941. Which is truly surprising. But not so much
The Eumenides confronts two contradictory perspectives: the Furies of the ancient order against Apollo of the young generation of Gods. Aeschylus introduces spiritual conflict within the human and universal realms. There is a lack of understanding of justice within the individual, producing an interrelational struggle amongst citizens, and resulting to the incomplete human identity in correspondence to their community. The justice system conquers upon an arbitrary verdict, providing little insight of the positions of good or evil. Aeschylus, through Athena, offers a compromise between two opposing radical ideas, balancing the neutrality of logic and sentiment within the individual, to strengthen unity of a society, and to stimulate the transcendance of humanity.
People of all different races and ethnicities are locked behind bars because they have been convicted of committing a crime and they are paying for the consequences. When looking at the racial composition of a prison in the United States, it does not mimic the population. This is because some races and ethnicities are over represented in the correctional system in the U.S. (Walker, Spohn, & DeLone, 2018). According Walker et al. (2018), African-Americans/Blacks make up less than fifteen percent of the U.S. population, while this race has around thirty-seven percent of the population in the correctional system today. Along with African-American/Blacks, the Hispanic population is underrepresented at both the state and federal levels while the Caucasian/White population are underrepresented (Walker, Spohn, & DeLone, 2018).
Plea- bargaining is something that is happening in our court systems every day. Plea-bargaining is a choice that defendants are making when they don’t have many options. Can plea- bargains change your life? What effects will it have if you decide to do a plea? Well, plea bargains are not for everyone.
Plea bargains are negotiations between the prosecutor and the criminal defendant. In this negotiation, the criminal defendant consents to pleading guilty. When the criminal defendant takes the guilty plea, he or she is able receive reductions in their charges or sentences. There are pros and cons of plea bargains, but these bargains can be doing more harm than good. Plea bargaining is a simple process but can have long term repercussions. Criminal defendants should not be allowed bargain for a reduced sentence in exchange for a guilty plea because some defense lawyers may not represent the best interest of the client, it does not allow the criminal defendant to take full responsibility for their actions, and the victim and the family will not feel as justice was served if a violent crime had occurred.
The role of the criminal prosecutor is to prove that that defendant is truly guilty. It is there job to look at all the evidence that is available and use that evidence to show why it is true that that person committed the crime so that they are prosecuted the way that they need to be. The job of the criminal defense attorney is to look at all the evidence that the prosecutor is bringing forth and to show why that evidence is not reliable or does not have any proof that it is linked to the person being accused of the crimes. It is their job to try to keep the accused person from being sentenced. The judicial officer is the person wills all the power to decide what happens to the person being accused. They are the ones that the information
The United States criminal justice system is riddled with cases of many varieties. Some have obvious outcomes while others warrant more detailed analysis. However, some cases go beyond the court into other courts, where they are decided, such as Jackson versus Hobbs in 2012. The courts try to lighten the load of cases they have by offering plea bargaining, an agreement among a defendant and a prosecutor in which the defendant pleads guilty to a charge that is less severe than what he or she is initially charged for in the hopes that clemency will be administered. Sometimes, however, people accused of a crime are completely innocent, and it is not until technology is released, such as DNA testing, decades later that these people are proved to
Countless people are getting placed in the criminal justice system on meager charges. Then, the system offers them “Legal Misrepresentation,” even though Gideon v. Wainwright (Alexander, 2012, p. 85) stated that they are entitled to an attorney if they are accused of a serious crime and indigent. Yet, public defendant attorneys lack resources and are overburdened with a substantial caseload that they cannot give defendants suitable representation. Subsequently, these accused people are forced into a plea deal to offset spending the mandatory maximum sentences in prison.
The Supreme Court recently began hearing oral arguments in a case, where two men were convicted of bribery by a jury. However, that conviction was overturned by an appeal because the jury had been improperly instructed as to what constitutes a guilty verdict. The attorney for the defense, Lisa Blatt said, “The government should bear the consequences when overlapping charges produce split verdicts of acquittals and invalid convictions.” This quote identifies with one of the fundamental principles of the American legal system, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. While Blatt continues to argue that the vacated conviction is worthless. She said, “This court has never used a vacated conviction for any purpose,
Following ten hours of deliberation, the jury came to a verdict that ultimately shocked the nation that followed this case so closely: not guilty on all felony charges (Burke, 2011). Though the jury found Casey guilty on all misdemeanor charges, four counts of giving false information to a police officer, it was the not guilty verdict of first degree murder, manslaughter, and aggravated child abuse that shocked those following the case. Juror three in the trial stated days following the verdict that she, like many of the other jurors, that, “I did not say she was innocent. I just said there was not enough evidence. If you cannot prove what the crime was, you cannot determine what the punishment should be” (Burke, 2011). Unlike the belief that many in the nation had that the jury believed Casey Anthony was completely innocent, the jurors in the trial came forward to state that it was not that they found Casey to be completely innocent; it is that the believed that the argument that the prosecution presented was too specific to be proven based on the circumstantial evidence that they
Plea Bargaining is the most effective tool of prosecutors to minimize the time required to obtain convictions. Around ninety percent of cases are concluded using plea bargaining. (Barkan and Bryjack, Page 2) This process moves cases through the system quickly and prevents the need to add more judges and court systems if these cases were to go to trial. (Barkan and Bryjack, Page 249) From the judge and prosecutors point of view, this is a necessary and effective method of managing caseloads.
Trial by jury has been a part of the criminal justice system since the 12th century (Davies, 2015), it is considered an ancient right and a symbol of liberty (Hostettler, 2004). It creates no precedent and it can decide challenging cases equitably without making bad law, it also brings members of the public into the administration of justice and into an understanding of legal and human rights (Hostettler,