The main reason for reform in the courts, jails and prisons is to protect the innocent and to assure proper sentencing is handed down. American Trial Jury Reform is something members of Congress have sought to bring to the floor for discussion. Reform is necessary for several reasons, one being that in some cases, judges hand down sentences that either do, nor do not fit the crime. When this is the case, most often the judge has prior knowledge of the case that has never been brought forward.
The U. S. Congress and others have rejected any aspect of jury reform, using the U. S. Constitution's original format in defense of hearing the matter. The problem is that the U. S. Constitution seems to have lost its importance with lawmakers and the American people over the years. As a result, very changes have been made when it comes to reform over the years.
In most areas, judges allow jurors to decide the facts on a case. After which, the jury deliberates as to whether a Defendant is guilty or innocent, hand down a verdict, then allow the judge to determine sentencing based largely on precedents and State requirements.
Other reforms deal with the proper sentencing for each crime, while eliminating racial profiling by court officials, judges and jurors. The attorneys also hold greater power in having heard and seen all the evidence prior to the trial. Jurors on the other hand, only see the evidence as presented, then possibly during deliberations.
If a trial takes places, judge and jury can often bounce off one another along with the defense and prosecution. When a judge gives instructions, the jury need follow; It can also be good to ask which are advisory, and, which are required. While witness tampering can be criminal in nature, there are also mistakes due to misunderstandings related to judicial instructions.
When keeping in mind that cases often involve issues related to legal matters that neither the judge nor any of the lawyers have encountered previously, each case is new and different. So too, the learning experience each time a new defendant and plaintiff enter a courtroom.
It can be interesting to sit as a juror in a trial. Sitting with others and hearing a case for any period of time, whether a half day, full day, week or month long trial, most often doing so can be a learning experience. If nothing else, individuals can get insight into how well the court and justice system work in the State in which the proceedings are being held.
Inciting change has now become seen as inciting a riot in some areas, nothing could be further from the truth. It is the folks calling out for change whom are the ones desiring to live in a better and more just world. When individuals work toward making reform happen for the betterment of the innocent, and toward a just and fair America for all, others benefit as well.
The U. S. Congress and others have rejected any aspect of jury reform, using the U. S. Constitution's original format in defense of hearing the matter. The problem is that the U. S. Constitution seems to have lost its importance with lawmakers and the American people over the years. As a result, very changes have been made when it comes to reform over the years.
In most areas, judges allow jurors to decide the facts on a case. After which, the jury deliberates as to whether a Defendant is guilty or innocent, hand down a verdict, then allow the judge to determine sentencing based largely on precedents and State requirements.
Other reforms deal with the proper sentencing for each crime, while eliminating racial profiling by court officials, judges and jurors. The attorneys also hold greater power in having heard and seen all the evidence prior to the trial. Jurors on the other hand, only see the evidence as presented, then possibly during deliberations.
If a trial takes places, judge and jury can often bounce off one another along with the defense and prosecution. When a judge gives instructions, the jury need follow; It can also be good to ask which are advisory, and, which are required. While witness tampering can be criminal in nature, there are also mistakes due to misunderstandings related to judicial instructions.
When keeping in mind that cases often involve issues related to legal matters that neither the judge nor any of the lawyers have encountered previously, each case is new and different. So too, the learning experience each time a new defendant and plaintiff enter a courtroom.
It can be interesting to sit as a juror in a trial. Sitting with others and hearing a case for any period of time, whether a half day, full day, week or month long trial, most often doing so can be a learning experience. If nothing else, individuals can get insight into how well the court and justice system work in the State in which the proceedings are being held.
Inciting change has now become seen as inciting a riot in some areas, nothing could be further from the truth. It is the folks calling out for change whom are the ones desiring to live in a better and more just world. When individuals work toward making reform happen for the betterment of the innocent, and toward a just and fair America for all, others benefit as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment