Remembering the jury trial from the Oscar winning movie 12 Angry men when the murder trial of Pistorius ends, fate being decided by the judge and two court officials just because of the jury being banned in South Africa in 1969.
The same thing happened in South Africa, which lead to the cancellation of the jury being the victim of racism and reluctant to many people to be served by them is very similar what happens in the United States of America.
Some cases involving patent law are decided by the judges with almost no legal training or experience. This results in false decisions of the law punishing the innocents and leaving the convicts.
How it started in America?
The first jury trial is believed to start with King Henry 2, ruler of England from 1154 to 1159 who decided 12 panels named as free and lawful men to make to settle land disputes as informed by American Bar Association.
Colonialism in America resulted in special trials in place of juries their deprivation moving the British. However, after the independence, trials were restored in order by the government of the United States. The proof of this can be seen in the American constitution in the sixth amendment, which states criminals having the right to have public and fast trial by the jury of the area and in case of guilt, punishment to be granted appropriately.
Problem of the Jury
This takes its way long before with Judge Julius Howard Miner and jury acquitting O.J. Simpson complaining the legal members for the concern of juries were granting not guilty to dangerous criminals with concrete proof.
A paper published in 1946 by Miner stating that defense lawyer’s attend jury with judges with little legal training or experience and there by the paper said in detail, an intelligent juror will raise no questions on common things seen. Lacking this endowment, defense lawyers give them a very few chances for questioning and if at all they do so, they are excused by them. The solution suggested by Miner was an intelligence test with better instructions to guide jurors and ensure integrity.
Burden of Finances
Jury duty for some occurs as a financial burden, as many (in fact most) states are not willing to pay their employers while on jury. Recovering from the recession, an article published by the famous newspaper “The New York Times” stressed on this matter by taking a call to jury duty striking fear of financial ruin. This article mentioned some workers who had employers not willing to pay for their time on jury service, and others who were unemployed being looking for jobs.
After a few years of being article posted, there was no improvement in seen in the system. It was observed that no payment was granted to the jurors as employers thus sometimes resulting in financial ruin.
There is another way to look at this matter, the duty as a civilian. Some jurors have to stay away from their work for many days and which results in workload. When deciding the fate of a member the mafia may have to worry about their safety, but jurors making a decision for dangerous convicts may be worried and fussed over their decision to make.
Citizens making this kind of sacrifices may not have to do so and the fate of those who defend cannot be in the hands of the people who serve the court on a temporary basis. Moreover, jurors with no legal training cannot be trusted as a whole which is definitely a job of legal experts.
We cannot say it is the fault of a single country such as the United States of America to depend on this form of jury and we cannot believe that this is true also but we have to stay with the reason the veto power to people with no legal knowledge is of course a question about the safety of people by the criminals who remain not guilt. Moreover, it may be possible to penetrate the jury with the influence of money and power which is quite concerning to everyone. Still, at the very least a concern should be raised to this matter as early as possible.