Assessing The Jury Decision. 4
Bias in the jury deliberation 5
Sixth amendment 7
Case of injustice 8
As we know that the jury trial is very much important in any country. They are the part of the law and have the important role in it as well they have a different way of interpreting, perceiving as well as remembering the evidence. The group process is also involved in the deliberation of the jury the hurries are involved in the real world laboratory so that they can resolve the issues related to the memory. Reasoning, decision making, stereotyping, judgment, group behavior as well as persuasion
The jury system was started in the 12th century in England. It was established by the to know about the matter of the law to tell the matter to the court to have the hearing. The earlier part of the 12th century, the right to a fair trial is the concept of bias in jury deliberation. The juror bias is so extreme. The application of legal rules to reach verdicts is the main outcome towards jury deliberation. The jury were seen as it is just for the king because they discover the answers to the questions or the facts and the final decision was made by the king.
At the end of the 15th century, it was regarded as the most important common law. The parties were allowed to bring the project, and the specific person was selected to be the jury. Talking about the USA, the jury system is very much important part of the country after the war it has become the important part o the American law. The jury system is the combination of the rule o law with common sense .these both the law, as well as the community, gets the benefit from it
The jury is regarded as the very different institution. The ordinary citizens lack in the legal training, but they are required that they must hear the evidence. They are required to make sense of the flicking facts. And the legal rules are applied so that they can reach the verdict for the purpose to which the jury will agree
Juries in most cases are used in the criminal case. The countries like Australia, US, Japan, etc. use the juries in the criminal case as well as in the civil case too. There are criteria’s set in each of the cases to which if the person is met then the person will be held liable to take the punishment.
The racial basis has become very much talk of concern among the colors as well as among many people. According to the scholarship, the biases are also the reason for this because of the racial factors and for the legal notices which are made through the complex individual level interactional as well as group level and also in some situations as well. There are many structural forces for this too. There is also the diverse body of truth which indicates the ethnic bias as well as racial bias which motivates the outcomes related to the criminal cases as well
Assessing The Jury Decision.
It is very much difficult to analyze the decision made by the jury .it is impossible in man poses that if the verdict was right. At some times, the subsequent truths also come into the light as the case of DNA evidence, but these are the rare incidents. These cases are difficult as well as different. Only the small percentage exist on it. These cases are mostly problematic. The thing is to be fair all along.
The question is that if the jury has made the correct verdict. If the verdict seems to be reasonable in the law and evidence light. The example can be the criminal trial of the O.J Simpason which was done for the purpose of the murder of the Ronald Goldman as well as Nicile brown simpson. the question arises here was of the acquittal of Simpson by the jury was seen as the optimal verdict. It would be said by many that probably not. But to answer the question that they reach the reasonable verity than the answer could be certainly yes. .it is because-because of the light of the evidentiary inconsistencies as well as high standard of proof and also in the allegations made by the police misconduct
Bias in the jury deliberation
It has been found in the recent researches that there are many researchers who have made use of the mock jury experimental paradigm or the purpose of demonstrating the list of characteristics for the trail participants like the race, physical attractiveness as well as genders (see MacVoun, 1989) in order to find out that they can be the reason for the judgment prejudice jurors (dane and wrightsman, 1982). The effects of the prejudicial are being labeled as the extralegal biases for the purpose that they are dependent on the factors which are seen as irrelevant logically for the determination of the guilt in the sense in which they are being manipulated5.
But it has also been seen that in many experimentations made on the evidence for these biases has been come from the individual mocks juror studies who have not been deliberate in the groups. In this article, it has been seen that how the biases have been made in the decision of the jury. Looking at the social decision scheme approach, it has been analyzed the jury bias by Davis, Kramer, Nago in 1988.
They examine the relationship which exists between the initial juror distribution to the deliberation as well as the final group decision. The mock juries have been found in the reliable finding that they used to reach the verdict which as being voted by a majority of the people at the onset of the deliberation. The majority rule was applied at making the decision. The most result was that weak preferences were given in the group which would be done by the discussion .they tend to produce the group polarization. The analysis was made that the jury deliberation may amplify the extra logical biases which were made by the preferences of the individual juror.
In the model of the information integration for the purpose of the decision making made by the Kalpan and Miller in 1978.This model evaluates the hror likelihood of the guilt which was hypothesized by the juror initials opinion. The evidence was introduced at the trial. The relevance, as well as credibility, was also introduced in that model.
It was being argued by the Kalpna and Miller in 1978 that the extralegal biases in the initial opinion were reflected. Anything would increase the effect of the initial juror opinion. The biases need to be reduced, and the favor must be gone to the verdict .it will be seen as more plentiful, plausible and salient.
They suggested that if the body of evidence is in support of the given verdict, then there will be a great impact on the judgment of the juror. It will be recalled as well as will discuss in the deliberation of the group. The biases which are found in the predeliberation judgment will be seen in the post-deliberation judgments .it is important that the judgments should need to be polarized in that area which is being supported by the evidence.
There is also the situational or state biases by the Kaplan and Miller in 1978.it was supported by the experiment of the mock jury. The situational or state bias will have the relative strength of the evidence. It will be seen as manipulated. There is a great influence in the predeliberation guilt ratings as well as in the ratings of the post-deliberation. It will be shifted in the initial strength direction of evidence. It will be no longer influenced by the extralegal variables. There is important findings which suggested that the mock juror judgments may have the extracted impact in the absence of the deliberation group. It will have the effect of the extralegal biases. it will be seen in the actual jury verdict.kalpan and miller in 1978, the is a great degree of the obnoxiousness of different trial participants. This is what they call it the state or situational bias.
There were other many studies which show that the juror biases is also able to sustain as well as enhanced through the deliberation like Bray and noble in 1978. They also found that the , jurors personal predisposition is also important in order to get the conviction as well as acquittal which can be seen in the abstract predisposition in order to vote for the purpose verdict preferences in some particular cases .it can be done after and before the process of deliberation 7.
There is also the sixth amendment in the case of the criminal prosecution. In this amend net it has been said that there are something which the accused should enjoy. It is right for the speedy as well as public trial. It is by the impartial jury of the district as well as the state in which case the crime has been committed.
According to the sixth amend net there s the protection which is offered to the people who have been accused of committing the serious crimes. Through this amendment, the accused is allowed that they shall hear their cases along with the impartial just which is made up of the people that are surrounded by the community. They have no connection to the case as well. There are some cases as well in which the news is being covered about the crime. It allows the jury members that they can pick from the outside places in which the crime was done.
In the absence of the sixth amendment. It provides the right for the speedy trial, the defendant of the criminal will be indefinitely held. It would be under the in proven cloud which is accusations. Moreover, the speedy trail is also seen as the important for the purpose of fair trial. It is because of the fact that the trail is held for a long period in order t o occur the witness. He may leave the area or may die.
It could also happen that the memories may also fade as well as the physical evidence may also be lost .it is guarantee by the public trail that it protects the defendant from the secret proceedings which may also encourage the judicial system abuse. It could also happen that the criminal defendants may voluntarily give up the public rights as well. Like the renunciation, it can be referred to as the wavier. It may also limit the judges from the public access for the trial to happen in some of the circumstances like the protect op for the witness private so that it can reach to the court,
it is guarantee provided by the sixth amendment that there is the right to the criminal defendant that can have the attorney right. It does not depend on the ability of the defendant so that he can pay the attorney. If the defendant is not able to afford it, then it si important that the government should provide them. There is the right for the effective defense .he do not guarantee to provide the successful defended, he will be able to receive the effective legal assistance as well as he will be convicted
the suspect may also be able to change the jury as well if he is not satisfied with them, or of he is found to be the guilty of bias so in that cases the suspect has the right to change the jury of he wants to change
Case of injustice
In the case of the United States v. Henley, 238 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2001), it has been shown the biases made in the jury deliberation. In this case, there is the little doubt that there was racial prejudice made in some of the jury deliberation .so the result was that it would seem reasonable to say that the issue will surface in that case in Maine. The four arguments were presented in the case for supporting the juror testimony. So that will be unlikely that the court will be able to persuade because of them if it reached the conclusion first about the racial prejudice. It has no place in the deliberation.
There are two arguments which seem to acknowledge about the case directly .the law court will also be benefited if they consider them. the court will want to hold that the racial prejudice is the mental as well as msicpundy. It allows the testimony as being the gloss. On the other hand, the court may also think about the rule 606(b).it can be unconstitutional. These arguers address the issues directly. The first is goof because the basis for decision is provided .it does no require the direct challenge to the constitutionality of the rule
The better approach for the rule would be that the advisory committer that they must amend the 606(b) rule. There will be a textual basis for the trail; courts for relying on when they will address the admission ability of the post-verdict juror testimony. It will also prove to be racial prejudice a well. The courts may also be ale to develop the standards as we;; to have the different comments. They will determine of they should be deemed prejudicial. It will be a rebuttable presumption.
There are many arguments which are for the absolute sever of the deliberation/so that is clear that the fear of justice is not founded on the massachusres, Washington state examples. Because in these states, they allow the juror evidence for showing the racial prejudice when suffering deliberation. Moreover, the valuable purpose is served by the rule 606.
It must not be discarded as it helps in protecting the integrity of the jury process. The racial prejudice in the processor of deliberation also presents the example that when the rule needs to be yields or the purpose of fairness. It will leave the hollow for the rights that need to be fair and deny the defendants .it is the only viable way for collecting the evidence in ruder to prove to the jury deliberation about the racial prejudice
The jury system is regarded as the very y important as well as curious institution. I t is the hallmark of the Anglo-American legal procedure as well. It is being used sparingly .it also contains many domains for the psychologist as well. The deep stud about the jury system in the process of decision making will help in getting the better understanding of the social and cognitive psychological process.
It helps in making the task of the jury behavior clearer because their task is not the easy one. They performs their duties well, but there is always the room for improvement. There are many studies done by the psychologist as well which suggest them about the ways for increasing the trials of the jury
In conclusion, it can be said that the jury bias needs to be overcome because they are extremely important for the purpose of creating the fair atmosphere. The beliefs, values of the jury bias is also important for the trial court system. In this ethological era, the political, media, as well as tort reframes, are able to attack n the justice system in the more specific or general ways. It also had an impact n the jury system. The jurors also enter in the court panel with having more types of bias. It affects them deeply and enhance their biases as well in the history of the republic.
The judges then also limit their time at the same time for the purpose of the voter dier examination of the prospective jurors. In spite of knowing about the facts that there is the need for the information that is to the jurors.
It has also been founded out in some of the citric as well. It has been seen that it is not appropriate to analyze the individual judgments’ of the defendants because in real life the hydridic decision making needs to have the social interaction ( written and diamond in 1978), the critic are applicable primary as the inappropriate generalization is made in the results of the studies. the personal characteristics are also effects the information about the extent to which the jurors are being effected because of the initial impression of the dependents
It is also hoped that the information which his provided in this paper will help for the purpose of opening the new avenues as well as coping with the multitudes of biases as well. It will also help in confronting the trial lawyers as well .it will also help their clients as well in today and future , it will also help in assisting them s that they will be able to get the higher level of the justice.
Annenbergclassroom.org. (2016). Sixth Amendment. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from annenbergclassroom.org: http://www.annenbergclassroom.org/Files/Documents/Books/Our%20Constitution/Sixth%20Amendment_Our%20Constitution.pdf
Bornstein, B. H., & Greene, E. (2011). Jury Decision Making: Implications. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from Law.nyu.edu: http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/upload_documents/Jury-Decision-Making.pdf
Davies, G. (1996). Psychology, Law, and Criminal Justice: International Developments in Research and Practice. Walter de Gruyter.
Helman, A. C. (2010). RACISM, JURIES, AND JUSTICE. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from marcusclegg.com: http://marcusclegg.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/62MeLRev327.pdf
Howardnations.com. (2016). OVERCOMING JURY BIAS. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from howardnations.com: http://www.howardnations.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/OJB.pdf
Howe, A. (2016). Argument preview: Justices to consider racial bias in jury deliberations. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from scotusblog.com: http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/10/argument-preview-justices-to-consider-racial-bias-in-jury-deliberations/
Langbein, J. H. (2005). The Origins of Adversary Criminal Trial. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from oxfordscholarship.com: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199287239.001.0001/acprof-9780199287239
LIPTAK, A. (2016). Supreme Court Weighs Bias and Secrecy in Jury Deliberations. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from nytimes.com: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/us/politics/supreme-court-bias-jury-deliberations.html?_r=0
Riordan, D. P., & Horgan, D. M. (2013). U.S. v. HAYAT. Retrieved November 5, 2016, from http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FCO%2020130313163/U.S.%20v.%20HAYAT
vermontjudiciary.org. (2016). ORIGINS AND HISTORY OF THE JURY. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from vermontjudiciary.org: https://www.vermontjudiciary.org/MasterDocument/jury-originsandhistory.pdf
Vogue, A. d. (2016). Supreme Court grapples with racial bias in jury deliberations. Retrieved november 02, 2016, from edition.cnn.com: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/11/politics/supreme-court-jury-deliberations/
Wilcox, D. C., & Corporation, X. (2011). Bias: The Unconscious Deceiver.