Juror Information Essay

936 words - 4 pages

First of all, the information the court should get from a potential juror would be basic information about them. The basic information would include their age, race, job, etcetera. Next the court finds out characteristics about them such as leadership qualities, sensitivity, arrogance, attitudes, morality, values, and perception about certain situations. Learning about their past experiences and what they like to do for fun is important, too. These characteristics will help determine how the court may perceive the potential juror. Some examples of these would included what was that person’s biggest accomplishment or if that person has ever been a manager or has directed a project. The question about the person’s feelings about the current administration could also be asked.
The following are standard questions that the court will ask potential jurors to see if any of which would keep them from being available for the whole trial:
1. Medical conditions
2. Mental conditions
3. Can you read, write and understand English?
4. Is anyone related to or associated with or worked with any of the people involved in this trial?
5. Does anyone have any beliefs that would keep them from forming a judgement against another person?
6. Does anyone know more about this case then they have just been told?
7. Can you be objective and fair to everyone involved in the trial?
8. Can you all understand and apply the law as it will be explained to you?
The following questions would be asked of each potential jury themselves:
1. First, middle, last name and their age
2. City they live in
3. Whether they are married, single, divorced, separated
4. How many children they have and their ages
5. Type of education they have and the level they went to
6. Do they have education or actual experience in the legal field?
7. Their work history going back 10 years including who they worked for, what their position was and what they did and how long they worked for each place
8. The same information as number 7 only as applied to their spouse or any adult living in their household
9. Their primary activities or hobbies that are outside
10. Do they have any military background? If they do, what branch did they serve under, how long, what highest rank they obtained, what their duties consisted of or if they are discharged and what type was it?
11. Any prior military service
12. Any involvement in any civil lawsuit at all personally or work related
13. Any friends or family involved in civil lawsuits personally or work related
14. Were they ever a witness either at court or in a deposition?
In the Jury Guide (2010), Lawyers and/or the judge ask jurors questions about their personal lives or beliefs about certain issues: especially if it pertains to the upcoming case. The reason why they do this is evaluate the juror’s ability to serve and...

Find Another Essay On Juror Information

Movie Analysis "Twelve Angry Men"

1745 words - 7 pages . An effective group should include teamwork, respect, motivation, cooperation etc. and of course a good attitude. Moreover, an ideal group only succeeds when it has achieved a balance between the group goals and its member's needs. So, it is very important to share opinions, information and to speak up! It is obviously that group members rarely work together for a long time without expressing disagreements. Conflict is unavoidable in

"12 Angry Men" - Analysis

3308 words - 13 pages emotions out. Communication needs to be broaden to listening and receiving information that others are saying rather than listening only for facts about the case as in the example between Juror numbers four and nine and the glasses.The jury would benefit from conducting the forming stage of the group development and spending a few moments getting to know each other. They spent several days together but fail to make introductions, although a few of the

PLT Paper Case Study of 12 Angry Men

1976 words - 8 pages can apply this knowledge to my professional and personal negotiation strategies. The first phase of the negotiation process is known as the preparation phase, it can be defined as when you acquire all the documentation, facts, data and information necessary to bring others into agreement (Karim, 2013). The trial of the accused murderer in the movie is the preparation phase. During this phase juror #8 learned who committed the crime, what crime

Characters from the Movie, 12 Angry Men

917 words - 4 pages trying to look at this case as logically as someone can and he is trying to take all of the information and trying to put it into good use. But he is kind of arrogant and thinks just because this boy is brought up in the slums that he is a criminal. That is where the arrogentness comes into play, he talks a lot about possessions that being money and juror #10 tells him to shut his dirty mouth voted not guilty at the end. Juror #5: Works at a

Twelve Angry Men

1488 words - 6 pages other like kids until they conclude a verdict. In the play, Twelve Angry Men, a group of men are summoned for jury duty and almost all of the men would rather conclude a verdict immediately and leave; except for one, Juror #8. He managed to detain the group by requesting for a discussion of the murder trial before voting “guilty” or “not guilty.” Not once did Juror #8 allow the others to influence him unless they had a valid explanation. Often

Group Dynamics in 12 Angry Men

1594 words - 6 pages . He has the misfortune to be selected Foreman of the jury ' a task he clearly does not enjoy. Juror #2 is a small, quite man who is clearly unaccustomed to giving his own opinion much less to expecting his views to be of any importance. In his subdued 'observer' and meek 'information giver' role, No. 2 apparently finds comfort in his job ' he is an accountant. Juror # 3 is probably the most complex personality in the film. He starts off like a

The Rodney King Trial

1848 words - 7 pages the ground offering no resistance as the cops pummeled him reportedly fifty-six times in the body and face,” (Carter 2). From the tape, the member’s of the jury had the opportunity to see, for themselves, the acts of brutality that took place. Some of the damages caused “skull fractures, nerve damage, a crushed cheekbone, a broken ankle and possible brain damage” (Brady 1).With this information, the members of the jury were able to come to the

Jurors and Cases in Court

1229 words - 5 pages as replying to another juror’s comment. Equally important to the component of participation in analyzing jury deliberations is that of information sharing among jurors. It is natural to converse about facts of a trail during deliberations even though courts tend to look down upon this. Each juror starts out each one of these information sharing like sessions with a core set of views based on their own interpretations. As discussions on the case

Twitter Goes To Court

589 words - 3 pages cease to Exist, now that their wallet is 12m lighter." (Sylvester, 2009) In the Arkansas case, the juror in question may have caused a mistrial for answering a twitter question of: "What are you doing?" (twitter.com, 2009)In conclusion, both of the articles that were briefly discussed demonstrate the power of information. The federal judge wanted the information of the court proceeding to be shared through the use of the twitter service. The

The Anonymity of Juries

2510 words - 10 pages addresses. Because such disclosure does not undermine the purpose of juror anonymity and more than adequately substitutes for the information normally inferable from names and addresses, it should be permitted in every case using the procedure. Some aspects of juror anonymity may even work to a defendant's advantage. Assuming attorneys are able to discern subtle prejudices from a prospective juror's group affiliations

The Impact of Social Stereotypes on Juror´s Decisions

664 words - 3 pages found guilty compared to female defendants, or does the match with the crime type matter? Jurors are randomly selected citizens who are given the task of determining whether someone is guilty or not, based solely on the evidence provided by the court. (Functions and Duties of a Juror, n.d.) However, jurors, who like all other humans, have the potential to be biased, meaning that their final decision can sometimes be influenced by many factors. The

Similar Essays

Comparing And Contrasting Juror 3 And Juror 8 From Twelve Angry Men

1396 words - 6 pages hasn’t seen him since. This experience probably left him the impression that all kids take their loved ones for granted, and that they deserve severe punishments. Juror 3 is not the type to provide the sharpest evidence or information, but he is very determined to prove that the accused really did murder the victim. Juror 8 practically gives nothing away about his real life, probably because he did not want to add his own prejudices to the case

Indifference Of The Law And Compassion: Contrasting Perspectives

1510 words - 7 pages defendant. Juror Eight's first attempt to stimulate sympathy for the defendant spring from a moment of indignation. Juror Eight responds to the claim that the “The man's dangerous killer. You could see it.”, with a short outburst: “The man! He's 16 years old”(Rose 11). Juror Eight emphasizes this information not as a logos based argument that youth are statistically less likely to commit murder and therefore the entire case deserves extra scrutiny

12 Angry Men Essay

1776 words - 7 pages - listenerJuror 6- gatekeeperJuror 7- aggressorJuror 8- information seekerJuror 9- encouragerJuror 10- opinion giver (rude)Juror 11- harmonizerJuror 12- energizer (joker)How was the maintenance part of the group process balanced with the task?Though the jurors did get out of order from time to time they at least heard each other out and made decisions as a group. The different types of voting techniques, such as secret ballot and show of hands, made the

The Mendez Brothers Trial Essay

1797 words - 8 pages !” (Rose 20). He refused to believe Juror Five’s argument because it opposed his. His stubbornness blinded him from the obvious facts that made the defendant seem innocent. When Juror Eight asks Juror Three,”Where do you get all your information about how it was done?” he responds with,”What do you mean? It’s just common sense” (Rose 19). There isn’t significant evidence or reasoning that Juror Three provides to support his accusation. He