Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACT The jury trial has a long history, its beginnings can be found in antiquity. Over time, the classic jury trial has been transformed into various models under the pressure of factors inherent in certain legal systems. At the present stage, it functions in most democracies, using the features characteristic of each country. However, the level of feasibility of using this institution in each state is different. Focusing on this problem is to consider the features of the functioning of the institution of jury trial as a guarantor of law and justice. This article analyzes the concept and individual characteristics of the functioning of the institution of the jury trial.RESUMEN El juicio con jurado tiene una larga historia, sus inicios se pueden encontrar en la antigüedad. Con el tiempo, el clásico juicio por jurado se ha transformado en varios modelos bajo la presión de factores inherentes a ciertos sistemas legales. En la etapa actual, funciona en la mayoría de las democracias, utilizando las características propias de cada país. Sin embargo, el nivel de viabilidad de utilizar esta institución en cada estado es diferente. Centrarse en este problema es considerar las características del funcionamiento de la institución del juicio con jurado como garante de la ley y la justicia. Este artículo analiza el concepto y las características individuales del funcionamiento de la institución del juicio con jurado.

ABSTRACT The jury trial has a long history, its beginnings can be found in antiquity. Over time, the classic jury trial has been transformed into various models under the pressure of factors inherent in certain legal systems. At the present stage, it functions in most democracies, using the features characteristic of each country. However, the level of feasibility of using this institution in each state is different. Focusing on this problem is to consider the features of the functioning of the institution of jury trial as a guarantor of law and justice. This article analyzes the concept and individual characteristics of the functioning of the institution of the jury trial. RESUMEN El juicio con jurado tiene una larga historia, sus inicios se pueden encontrar en la antigüedad. Con el tiempo, el clásico juicio por jurado se ha transformado en varios modelos bajo la presión de factores inherentes a ciertos sistemas legales. En la etapa actual, funciona en la mayoría de las democracias, utilizando las características propias de cada país. Sin embargo, el nivel de viabilidad de utilizar esta institución en cada estado es diferente. Centrarse en este problema es considerar las características del funcionamiento de la institución del juicio con jurado como garante de la ley y la justicia. Este artículo analiza el concepto y las características individuales del funcionamiento de la institución del juicio con jurado.

This study considers the hypothesis that juries with more experience are more likely to convict a defendant than less experienced juries are. The theory, which has wide support among prosecutors and defense attorneys, is tested by taking all the jury trials in the Sixth Judicial District in Arkansas for the years 1978 and 1979, identifying juries with greater experience and those with less experience during those two years, and using statistical analysis to determine the strength of the relationship. The results indicate that the theory is not statistically supported. An additional analysis was completed to determine if a relationship exists between jury experience and severity of sentence. This theory also could not be supported by the statistical data. The conclusion is reached that no relationship exists between jury experience and jury verdicts, but it is acknowledged that manipulation of the cases, which come before the various juries may skew the results of the statistical analysis.

The Japanese seeking to involve their citizens in the judicial system as well establishing a check on the power of the judiciary have enacted legislation to create jury trials. The type of jury trial enacted by this legislation, which takes effect in 2009, is a mixed-jury system where judges and citizens participate together in the jury deliberation. This article first explores the differences between mixed-juries and the American jury system. It then suggests why the Japanese opted for a mixed-jury system. From that point the article explores psychological theory surrounding collective judgment and how dominant individuals influence the group dynamics. With these theories in mind the article explores Japanese cultural attitudes and suggests that the objective of meaningful citizen participation might be impeded in the jury deliberation process. Finally the article proposes specific procedural devices to ensure meaningful citizen participation.