Unanimous Verdict Vs. Majority Rules Verdicts

901 words - 4 pages

The use of a jury is the traditional method within the common law for deciding the facts in any dispute between parties. The role of a jury is to determine question of fact. The jury is in a powerful method because ultimately, it determines whether a person is guilty or innocent. In civil cases, the main function of the jury is to find the facts having regard to the evidence, and assess damages. The number of jurors used in a civil trial is less than that used in a criminal trial. Another important difference is that the verdict does not have to be unanimous, meaning that a judge will accept a majority decision of a civil jury.Unanimity has long been considered as essential and fundamental part of jury trials. Unanimous decisions refer to the nature of the decision reached by a jury. All jury members must be in agreement as to the innocence or guilt of the accused in criminal cases or as to the liability of the defendant in civil cases. Where all are in agreement, the verdict is said to be unanimous. A unanimous verdict must be given in a criminal proceedings involving treason or murder. In all other criminal offences a majority decision out of twelve, will be accepted.Unanimity not only ensures that the minority viewpoint is heard, it gives people in the minority a vote of value, and hence enhances the representative character of the jury by ensuring the participation by individual citizens on the jury is real rather than illusionary. If a unanimous verdict is achieved, then in theory it corresponds to the level of proof required- in criminal offences being beyond reasonable doubt. Finally, the requirement of unanimous verdict ensures that the representative character and the collective nature of the jury are carried forward into the definitive verdict.On the other hand, there is a requirement of unanimity in jury decisions which creates delays in decisions and increases the cost of trials. When a jury cannot reach a unanimous decision it will be discharged and a new trial ordered, and as a result, substantial costs and expenses are often incurred due to the often-increased length of time that juries deliberate. In addition, there is sometimes one juror with radical/diverse views that causes disagreement amongst other jurors, and will refuse to take any other factors into account, and as a result, a retrial is ordered in which is an unwanted burden on the state and the accused person.In a case where a civil jury is not able to reach a unanimous verdict, it is permitted to return a majority decision. In criminal cases, a majority verdict requires at least ten out of twelve jurors, or...

Find Another Essay On Unanimous Verdict vs. Majority Rules Verdicts

The Criminal Procedure Essay

860 words - 3 pages jury that is unable to agree on whether to convict or acquit is called a hung jury. In some states the jury must be unanimous in their verdict, whereas other states permit less than unanimous verdicts in some cases. If the jury is unable to reach a verdict, the defendant, not having been acquitted, may be retried later before another jury. A retrial following a hung jury does not violate the Fifth Amendment's prohibition against double jeopardy

Magistrates Essay

7055 words - 28 pages threat of "nobbling", and although it is arguable that if two jurors favour acquittal then the prosecution have hardly proved their case "beyond reasonable doubt", some 20 per cent of convictions after trial nowadays arise from majority verdicts. If the evidence is legally insufficient the judge may direct the jury to return a verdict of "not guilty", and in exceptional circumstances he may direct a verdict of "guilty", but

Court Proceedings

3296 words - 13 pages determine the fact - whether the defendant is guilty of the charge on the basis of evidence. The jury will be told by the judge that it is their duty to seek to arrive at a unanimous verdict. Majority verdicts have been possible since 1967, but are only acceptable when the jury have been deliberating for a long period and have been directed by the judge that a majority verdict is acceptable. The judge will stress however

special needs prisoner

1400 words - 6 pages in seclusion and must be unanimous if determining guilt.At the beginning of deliberations the jury is required to select a foreman. This person is to be a leader figure for the jury in order to help their deliberations proceed smoothly. This may include settling disputes opinion or verifying matters of law from a qualified source such as the judge. The foreman is also tasked with reading the verdicts of the accused to the courtroom after the

Abusing the Force

1240 words - 5 pages media market. The jury comprises of ten white persons, one Hispanic person, and one Asian person, with no African Americans. Whereas, the jury renders its verdicts, finding the accused not guilty of all charges. The Independent Commission on the Los Angeles Police Department came out three months later documenting the systematic use of excessive force and racial harassment in the LAPD. If the beating was not purely racial, it still reflects

Psychology of the Courtroom

2505 words - 10 pages bow to the pressure and go with the majority view. The pressure on an individual (or number of individuals) to conform is important because in most countries (with the exception of England and Wales in certain cases) juries are required to give a unanimous verdict. Whilst the trial judge will ask if a unanimous verdict has been reached he/she will not ask how this decision was arrived at. The fact that the privacy of the

Procedures of American Criminal Trial

2653 words - 11 pages wins. Surprisingly, immediate unanimous decisions are not uncommon – they account for about 31 percent of all verdicts. Most jurisdictions require a unanimous decision, although the United States Supreme Court has ruled that only capital cases must warrant a unanimous verdict. Jurors are not allowed to discuss the case with relatives, friends, or each other until the proper time, because it is known that thinking is affected by the influence

The basic procedures of a standard American criminal trial...covers everything between indictment and sentencing.

2633 words - 11 pages courtroom for deliberations, they immediately choose a foreman, whose job it will be to deliver the final verdict. The jury may deliberate for hours, days, or weeks, and may examine evidence, review testimony, analyze the judge's charge, discuss, argue, and negotiate. Disagreements emerge early, but the majority almost always wins. Surprisingly, immediate unanimous decisions are not uncommon - they account for about 31 percent of all verdicts

Description of a jury trial in an english court, how effective they are and some criticisms.

1273 words - 5 pages serve on a jury in another trial.In the jury room.When the jury first goes to the jury room, the members may have very different views about the case. But the views of jurors may change as they discuss the evidence.The aim is for the jury to reach a unanimous verdict (i.e. all 12 agree on the verdict).If the jury cannot reach a unanimous verdict after a long discussion, the judge may decide to accept a majority verdict.--A majority verdict is a

An Evaluation of One Case at a Time

2520 words - 11 pages confessions. Miranda v. Arizona granted people with the standards and guidelines pertaining to their fifth amendment rights due to the broad and clear verdict given (Sunstein 55). In this sense, the absence of plain rules not only deprives individuals of personal knowledge but also reduces societies ability to democratically discuss the issues in existence. Essentially it can be inferred that minimalism and maximalism can successfully achieve more when

An Indictable Offence and How it is Brought to Trial

5286 words - 21 pages jury's verdict (guilty or not guilty) must normally be unanimous, but if after two hours they are still unable to agree the judge may accept a majority verdict (11-1 or 10-2, or 10-1 or 9-1 if some jurors have been discharged). About 20% of convictions are by a majority; the percentage of majority acquittals is unknown. If the jury are unable to reach a verdict, they may be discharged and the case retried before a

Similar Essays

Majority Verdicts In Australia Essay

1420 words - 6 pages The role of the jury is to determine innocence or guilt of defendant based on the evidence given in court. The requirement 12 people must find the defendant guilty beyond reasonable doubt has existed in law since the 14th century. In the past 12 jurors had to reach a unanimous verdict which was often difficult to achieve because of rogue jurors. It was inefficient in terms of time and tax payer money. Majority verdicts have been debated

Insisting Equality Essay

1965 words - 8 pages . One juror decided to stand up and take the time out for proper reasoning that resulted in teaching the others two jurors a lesson. Final verdicts should be made on justifiable grounds or the foundation of America’s society could be left at risk for collapse. Justifiable final verdicts are skewed when people follow the majority and that appeared to be a problem in the beginning of the play. The three jurors that stood out for their realism were

Law In Action Essay

1206 words - 5 pages evolved to a new justice system. England for example have introduced where juries try to reach a unanimous decision within 2 hours and if that isn’t achievable it is a majority verdict of 10/12. A downside to abolishing unanimous verdicts is that juries are supposed to make their decision of beyond reasonable doubt but the majority vote means that there is some reasonable doubt within the jury. Another country that has moved on from the jury

The Landmark Case Of Marbury V. Madison.

590 words - 2 pages unanimous decision of 4-0. However, there were many people who criticized this case. They calmed that Madison should have received the legal right to follow the presidents orders.This case was very important because it showed how the court system could function without any major flaws. They were able to decide on a verdict and allow the punishment to be carried out accordingly. This showed Americans that the Supreme Court had the power to make