ADVANTAGES & DISADVANTAGES OF JURY

Advantages & Disadvantages of Jury

Name of Writer

Name of Institution

Advantages & Disadvantages of Jury

Juries have been used in our legal system for over 1000 years. Initially they were used for offering local knowledge and information and functioned more as witnesses than decision makers. By the middle of the Fifteenth century, juries had become separate juryors and believed their contemporary part as deciders of reality.

Firstly, juries allow common people from a wide range of occupations to sign up in the management of justice and therefore the jury is regarded as one of the basic principles of a democratic society as the right to be tried by a person's colleagues (as mentioned in the Magna Carta 1215) is a bastion of independence against the state. Lord Devlin once pointed out that juries are 'the light that shows freedom lives'. The use of juries makes the law available to common people who are more able to associate with the society and so this regenerates trust in the British Legal System (Casper & Zeisel, 1972).

In inclusion, the custom of trial by jury is very old and so the society also has assurance in the impartiality and equity of a jury trial. However, it can be suggested that the combination of lack of ability, disoccupations and excusals in the process successfully limits large areas of the society as it simply leaves us with a very restricted classification which includes the jobless, outdated and rich people who can manage to take time off from work. Therefore, juries are not actually representative of a cross-section of society and so may not contain 'ordinary people' (Glendon, Carozza, & Picker, 2008).

Furthermore, another benefit of the use of juries is that they do not have to provide reason for their judgment and it is possible for them to choose on their idea of 'fairness'. Therefore, they are not restricted to adhere to the precedent of past situations or even Acts of Parliament but choose decisions on their reasoning of 'fairness'. This is sometimes termed as jury value. However, this type of choice can be seen as a perverse choice as it is one which is not validated. The drawbacks of jury value can be seen in clear cut situations such as R v Randle and Pottle (1991) where the offenders were charged with assisting the spy George Blake to evade from jail but the jury rejected to convict them (Glendon, Carozza, & Picker, 2008).

Moreover, the use of a jury is regarded as making the legal system more open as justice is seen to be done by people who are engaged in a key part in an open process. Therefore, this makes the law available to the common man. Moreover, it also helps to keep the law better as reasons have to be told the jury in a simple way and so allows the accused to comprehend the situation more easily. However, against this is the point that the jury planned in private, no one can consult into ...