Jury - Revision history

Cielo.linares at 14:59, 8 May 2012

2012-05-08T14:59:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:59, 8 May 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Languages\|Jury}}

	A jury is a body of lay people who act as factfinders during a criminal [[Trial \| trial]]. In some cases the jury may also act both finders of fact and finders of law. <ref>Indiana Constitution,Section 19 ("In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.")</ref>		A jury is a body of lay people who act as factfinders during a criminal [[Trial \| trial]]. In some cases the jury may also act both finders of fact and finders of law. <ref>Indiana Constitution,Section 19 ("In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.")</ref>

Cielo.linares: /* Jury Nullification */

2012-05-08T12:24:18Z

Jury Nullification

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:24, 8 May 2012
Line 20:		Line 20:
	----		----

	See [[Criminal Justice Systems]], [[Trial]]		See [[Criminal Justice Systems Around the World]], [[Trial]]

	==Notes==		==Notes==
	<references/>		<references/>

Cmattesich: /* Jury Nullification */

2010-08-23T12:08:21Z

Jury Nullification

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:08, 23 August 2010
Line 13:		Line 13:
	Even in jurisdictions where jury's are restricted to fact-finding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional.		Even in jurisdictions where jury's are restricted to fact-finding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional.

	Examples of jury nullification throughout history. In pre-Civil War United States, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violations of the Fugitive Slave Act. During prohibition, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violating the 19th Amendment. Jury nullification may have occurred throughout the history of the United States when all-white juries failed to convict white individuals being tried for the murder of African-Americans.		Examples of jury nullification throughout history:

			In pre-Civil War United States, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violations of the Fugitive Slave Act. During prohibition, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violating the 19th Amendment. Jury nullification may also have occurred throughout the history of the United States when all-white juries failed to convict white individuals being tried for the murder of African-Americans.

Cmattesich at 12:07, 23 August 2010

2010-08-23T12:07:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:07, 23 August 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, [[United States]], Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.		Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, [[United States]], Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.

	Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limit unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For ~~others~~, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.		Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limit unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide-ranging powers. For other countries, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.

	On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this belief has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.		On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this belief has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.
Line 9:		Line 9:
	==Jury Nullification==		==Jury Nullification==

	~~However, even in jurisdictions where jury's are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional.~~ Jury nullification occurs when a jury chooses to acquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.		Jury nullification occurs when a jury chooses to acquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.

	Examples of jury nullification throughout history. In pre-Civil War United States, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violations of the Fugitive Slave Act. During prohibition ,juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violating the 19th Amendment. Jury nullification may have occurred throughout the history of the United States when all-white juries failed to convict white individuals being tried for the murder of African-Americans.		Even in jurisdictions where jury's are restricted to fact-finding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional.

			Examples of jury nullification throughout history. In pre-Civil War United States, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violations of the Fugitive Slave Act. During prohibition, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violating the 19th Amendment. Jury nullification may have occurred throughout the history of the United States when all-white juries failed to convict white individuals being tried for the murder of African-Americans.

Cmattesich at 12:05, 23 August 2010

2010-08-23T12:05:36Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:05, 23 August 2010
Line 3:		Line 3:
	Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, [[United States]], Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.		Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, [[United States]], Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.

	Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to ~~limited~~ unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.		Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limit unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.

	On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this belief has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.		On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this belief has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.

Cmattesich at 12:20, 20 August 2010

2010-08-20T12:20:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:20, 20 August 2010
Line 5:		Line 5:
	Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limited unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.		Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limited unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.

	On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this ~~believe~~ has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.		On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this belief has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.

	==Jury Nullification==		==Jury Nullification==

	However, even in jurisdictions where ~~jurys~~ are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional. Jury nullification occurs when a jury ~~choses~~ to ~~aquit~~ an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.		However, even in jurisdictions where jury's are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional. Jury nullification occurs when a jury chooses to acquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.

	Examples of jury nullification throughout history. In pre-Civil War United States, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violations of the Fugitive Slave Act. During prohibition juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violating the 19th Amendment. Jury nullification may have occurred throughout the history of the United States when all-white juries failed to convict white individuals being tried for the murder of African-Americans.		Examples of jury nullification throughout history. In pre-Civil War United States, juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violations of the Fugitive Slave Act. During prohibition ,juries sometimes refused to convict defendants for violating the 19th Amendment. Jury nullification may have occurred throughout the history of the United States when all-white juries failed to convict white individuals being tried for the murder of African-Americans.

Ibjadmin: /* Jury Nullifiation */

2010-08-13T13:55:12Z

Jury Nullifiation

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:55, 13 August 2010
Line 7:		Line 7:
	On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this believe has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.		On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this believe has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.

	==Jury ~~Nullifiation~~==		==Jury Nullification==

	However, even in jurisdictions where jurys are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional. Jury nullification occurs when a jury choses to aquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.		However, even in jurisdictions where jurys are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional. Jury nullification occurs when a jury choses to aquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.

Ibjadmin at 11:54, 16 July 2010

2010-07-16T11:54:06Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:54, 16 July 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A jury is a body of lay people who act as factfinders during a criminal [[Trial \| trial]]. In some cases the jury may also act both finders of fact and finders of law. <ref>Indiana Constitution,Section 19 ("In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.")</ref>		A jury is a body of lay people who act as factfinders during a criminal [[Trial \| trial]]. In some cases the jury may also act both finders of fact and finders of law. <ref>Indiana Constitution,Section 19 ("In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.")</ref>

	Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, United States, Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.		Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, [[United States]], Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.

	Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limited unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.		Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limited unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.

Ibjadmin: /* Jury Nullifiation */

2010-07-16T11:53:34Z

Jury Nullifiation

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:53, 16 July 2010
Line 16:		Line 16:
	----		----

	See [[Criminal Justice Systems]]		See [[Criminal Justice Systems]], [[Trial]]

	==Notes==		==Notes==
	<references/>		<references/>

Ibjadmin at 21:08, 15 July 2010

2010-07-15T21:08:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:08, 15 July 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	A jury is a body of lay people who act as factfinders during a criminal [[Trial \| trial]]. In some cases the jury may also act both finders of fact and finders of law. <ref>Indiana Constitution,Section 19 ("In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.")</ref>		A jury is a body of lay people who act as factfinders during a criminal [[Trial \| trial]]. In some cases the jury may also act both finders of fact and finders of law. <ref>Indiana Constitution,Section 19 ("In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.")</ref>

			Jury trials may occur in both adversarial and civil law countries including Britain, United States, Brazil, Canada, Australia, France and Germany.

			Academics have concluded that the jury system benefits society because it is the only means by which the government puts power directly into citizens' hands. In many common law countries, the jury system is seen as a way to limited unbridled government power. This is particularly important in countries like the United States which grant prosecutors wide ranging powers. For others, the jury trial may provide their only opportunity to learn about governance outside of formal schooling.

			On the other side, critics of the jury system contend that juries cannot possibly understand sophisticated legal concepts and that they are easily swayed by prejudice or bias. In common law systems this believe has lead to the creation of complex rules of evidence intended to keep certain types of prejudicial evidence from the jury.

			==Jury Nullifiation==

	However, even in jurisdictions where jurys are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional. Jury nullification occurs when a jury choses to aquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.		However, even in jurisdictions where jurys are restricted to factfinding, the phenomenon of jury nullification is both documented and accepted as generally constitutional. Jury nullification occurs when a jury choses to aquit an individual even though evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the crime.