Mon 11 May, 2009 05:15 pm
A Jury is not allowed to speak of the matter's of a case with family and friends, due to the fact that there decisions could be influenced by such family and friends. A jury decisions are allready highly effected by there friends, family, and there own point of view and perception of the world around them, for this is human nauture. Yet judges decisions are slightly effected by there friends, family, and there own point of view and perception of the world around them, due to the fact that there decisions are higly or completly efffected and influenced by what they have been tlearned in school to gain such a status in the fields of law.Here are some questions that come to mind when reviewing these truths. Should a jury be dismissed from a role of judgement on the grounds that they lack needed prespective,schooling, and skills to make a decision not influenced by there friends and family? Should a people be given a test before they take part on a jury? Should a jury be replaced by people that have been proven to be fully capable of making a decision that is not highly effected by such influence? Is this ground for dismissing a jury from a court, if one preoves there are influenced by there family and friends?
In most Common Law jurisdictions, provision is made for trial by judge alone when the parties deem issues too complex to be entrusted to a jury. In some criminal cases the accused can elect to be tried by judge alone. This election is usually made when the defence is quite technical or the offence for which the accused is charged is apt to provoke an emotional response from lay jurors.