Introduction: At the end of a sensational trial, a former celebrity was acquitted of a brutal double murder. During the epic 252-day trial, the celebrity’s dream team of lawyers employed creative and controversial methods to convince jurors that his guilt had not been proved “beyond a reasonable doubt,” thus surmounting what the prosecution called a mountain of evidence implicating him as the murderer. Some people believe that the jury had been manipulated by a very smart, well-paid group of lawyers and that the accused should have been found guilty. In fact, he was found guilty at a civil trial. The civil jury found that more than likely this person did indeed cause the death of the two victims.
In order to understand the differences between the civil and criminal trial, we need to remember that the burden of proof is different: In the criminal system, the defendant must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil case, the plaintiff (accuser or one who initiates the law suit) needs to prove that the defendant’s intentional or negligent conduct resulted in the victim’s death. While some cheered at the verdict of the civil case, there are others who think that justice prevailed when the accused was found innocent by a jury of his peers.
We might begin to think that the law and justice are distant cousins; sometimes they don’t even talk to each other (Andre Brink). In a recent TV series, for instance, the defense lawyer says that she does not care if the defendant is guilty or innocent; it is her job to “muck it up” so that she can leave a doubt in the jurors’ minds and find her client not guilty. Can we say that such a practice is really honest? We have to ask ourselves if such a practice renders justice.
We also need to ask ourselves if perhaps using trial by bench is a more reliable method. So now we are left with the question: Are trials by juries actually the most reliable method to prove innocence or guilt or should we be using the trial by bench?
Let’s first look at the terms: In a criminal proceeding in state court, a defendant may face a jury trial or a bench trial. At a jury trial, a panel of twelve chosen people presides. At a bench trial, the judge makes the same procedural decisions, hears the evidence, and decides whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty.
The right to trial by jury in a criminal case resides in both Article III, Section 2 of the federal Constitution (“The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury”) and the Sixth Amendment (“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury”). However, the right isn’t as broad as those texts might suggest, meaning that many defendants have to settle for judge trials, where the court decides whether the defendant is guilty.
The argument against trial by jury includes the fact that not only can a jury find a guilty person innocent but also that it can find an innocent person guilty. A defendant, for example, who cannot afford an attorney and is appointed one who may be not too competent can receive a verdict of guilty instead of not guilty, despite the fact that he is really innocent. DNA, for instance, has proven this kind of situation to be true. On the other hand, we can say that juries help to preserve human liberty, individual dignity, and a free society. Most of the time, lawyers agree, the juries get it right, and twelve heads are better than one.
On the other hand, Singapore, Pakistan, India, and Malaysia abolished jury trials because the consensus was that juries are susceptible to bias. However, can we not argue that judges can also be susceptible to bias?
Read carefully the links to articles that argue both points of view. Should we abolish trials by juries or should we maintain trials by juries? Consider also if trial by bench is more reliable or if trial by jury should be reconstructed. Take a position and compose an argument. Do not forget to consider the opposite point of view from your stance and present a rebuttal. While you certainly may use your own voice, be careful to substantiate it with direct evidence from the articles.
Prompt: Should the US abolish the trial by jury system in favor of trial by bench?
