PROFESSIONAL JURORS

Professional Jurors: Should we have them in our courts?

Professional Jurors: Should we have them in our courts?

Introduction

The trial of a jury affect most criminal justice system in that a group of the defendants peer, who are taken from the community are called upon to render a fair and neutral judgment. These jurors are vulnerable to different external influences that are the media, and these have profoundly influenced the public, the jury pool and evaluate the facts and evidences of a trial (Mooney, Chen & Kraik, 2004). According to forensic experts, the media's broadcasting of potentially inadmissible prove such as in the film fiction, detector results and prior criminal records has the possibility to twist a juror's comprehension of the cases. One disadvantage of the professional jurors is that many of them are television programmed shows with expected copious amount of conclusive DNA, or fingerprint evidence (Gastil & Weiser, 2006). The US should not keep the current jury system, but should revamp it completely and embrace the European inquisitorial system because, in this, the judges ask questions and make a decision.

Scientific evidence has become the best option in determining if the defendant is guilty or innocent. An analysis that takes few minutes to report through the media may take around three weeks in reality, and according to the judicial system, it is illegal to hold a suspect for weeks, waiting for the sample to be sent off to the lab for examination (Moore, Newman & Turnbull, 2003). Since more proof is needed, both external and internal pressure may lead to incorrect rulings. In the regard, the suspect had worn a mask and it is hard to reveal its identity since they have hidden their faces, also the clothes that they were wearing during the incident they have left them behind leaving no substantial evidence to the jury. The human error in getting the wrong sample may also lead to the wrong results (Britt, 2009). There is also a lot of pressure on the labs and this may lead to incorrect results. An advantage is that, by the use of their blood which might have came about due to injuries, in the DNA test gives the professional jurors a higher chance of getting the criminals and there is enough evidence in this act. The CCTV installed around the bank will help identify a number of characters that was seen walking up to the bank to steal the money. Also, how the process is carried out, meaning there is sufficient evidence in the use of the media resources (Taylor, Ratcliffe, Dote & Lawton, 2007). The US should keep the current jury system because it helps track the criminal and it is easier protecting the civilian and the country as a whole through the application of the law. Little documentation implies that, the police do not do enough investigative work, since a criminal incident can be perpetrated yet their responses are often not as rapid. In this regard, this discussion will present a debate ...