Essay On Jury Nullification

The intersection of racial dynamics with the criminal justice system is one of longstanding duration. In earlier times, courtrooms in many jurisdictions were comprised of all white decision-makers. Today, there is more diversity of leadership in the court system, but race still plays a critical role in many

analysis must be based upon what is best for the Black community in this country.

Race is one of the most controversial topics when speaking of bias, and still to this day race is occasionally believed to sway the judicial system’s decisions. A recent statistic proved that less than 5 years ago in North Carolina more than 52% of potential black jurors were cut, or peremptory challenged, meaning they removed from a case without reason (S.M.). Not only do jurors experience discrimination but suspects on trial have also suffered for decades. Evidence shows judges sentence black convicts to 20%

Since Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, the criminal justice system of the United States has moved past racial discrimination greatly. With the election of President Obama in 2008, it would be easier to say that discrimination no longer exists in the criminal justice system. However, despite the progress that people of colour have made in society, there still exists a great racial disparity that can be seen through the rising trends of the sentencing and incarceration of minorities.

Jury nullification is the act of a jury in exonerating a defendant, even though they are truly guilty of violating the law. When this happens, the defendant is found innocent, even though without an act of jury nullification they would have been found guilty. Normally, jury nullification is carried out by a jury that disagrees with a law; this is a way of indicating their disagreement with the law, and their choice not to penalize the person who broke that law. Jury nullification is a

Jury nullification has since quite a while ago entranced courts, scholastics, and society when all is said in done. The force, or possibly right, of a jury to either convict or absolve a criminal litigant, in spite of the jury 's conviction that the law and proof request an opposite result, has mixed debate since its beginning, and keeps on polarizing. As it as of now stands, nullification possesses a position in the sundown, authoritatively denounced by the United States Supreme Court, yet permitted even urged to get by different, enduring assurances of choice jury making. Resounding the conclusions of courts around the nation, juries without a doubt have no privilege to invalidate, however, they likewise most likely have the ability to do as such, as nobody, not even the judge, is permitted to do much to control a rebel jury in a criminal trial. What 's more, finds, that while in many occasions nullification is

Jury nullification should continue to be recognized as a part of the Canadian justice system. The power of the juries should stay the same crucially because in some cases the defendant may actually have a reason to not be guilty even though they may be guilty for the crime that they have committed. Authors, Neil Brooks and Anthony Doob discuss about juries and the strengths and weaknesses about them and jury nullification. Chief Justice Fraser of the Alberta Court of Appeal discusses about Krieger 's Appeal and the strengths of jury nullification and how the jury following their conscience is sometimes better than following the “rule of law”. Paul Butler suggests that the law should expand jury nullification by allowing jurors who are the same race as the defendant who is guilty be free which I believe should not be added in the criminal justice system because of the many negative outcomes it may cause in society. Jury nullification is when a jury that takes part in a case believes that the defendant is not guilty even though he/she is guilty for the crime that they have caused by using their conscience instead of considering the facts that they have been presented by the law and that follow the rule of law. Jury nullification should continued to be recognized and the power of juries should be limited because of many reasons. Although jury nullification may be a positive factor to a defendant and to society as well, sometimes it won 't be if the power of juries stays the

The news is riddled with salacious stories about the criminal activities across the nation. It can seem like these events are taking place in another world, very far from your own. But when you find yourself being charged with a criminal act, the situation hits much closer to home, literally. There is a great amount of detail and skill involved in successfully telling your side of the story to the judge and the jury. Though some defendants choose to represent themselves at trial, this is never recommended! Your defense attorney should provide the court with a biased version of your story, meaning they should present you in a good light, emphasize the events that will lessen the chances of you being found guilty, and make the jury see you as someone who is innocent.

Criminal trials depend on the jury’s decision on whether a defendant is guilty or not of the crimes they are charged with. After examining the evidence and testimony during the trail, the jury will decide if the defendant broke the law. A judge will give specific instructions to follow, and the laws that govern the proceedings of the case.

From policing to a trial and the trail sentencing racial disparities persist at every stage of the United States Criminal Justice System. There are not a single factor that has contributed to racial profiling than the War on Drugs. All ethnic groups use and sell drugs at the same rate. Blacks and Hispanics comprise over 50% of these offenses. Whether on the federal, state, or local level police officers exercise discretion when determining whether someone’s behavior is suspicious enough that an investigation is done. Racial bias keeps more people of color in prisons and on probation than ever

As Anita Hill once stated, “We have a history of gender and racial bias in our court that continues to undermine the system. Excluding individuals based on race is antagonistic to the pursuit of justice.” RACISM- Another word for ignorance; another way of saying nature should have had only one type of flower or one species of animal. Racism is like looking at a box of crayons and not seeing all the colors. Racism is another word for fear- fear of the unknown. For many of us, those of diverse races and creeds are the great unknown. The simple question that begs asking is: why? What role does race truly play in the criminal justice system and is the system truly as colorblind as many individuals believe it to be? With this country’s shameful history of slavery, the Jim Crow Laws, and numerous other racially biased injustices, it seems likely race does, play a role in the countless facets in the United States (U.S) criminal justice system. Our system is clearly, not, color blind. Although a handful of naïve people remain oblivious to the racism ubiquitously occurring, negative attitudes toward people of color are, even now, prevalent in our courts. Not only is racism found in the corners of our streets, but also, it is found where we work, in schools our children attend, and, most significantly, in our justice system. It is about time for people to start examining the causes and begin looking for resolutions to this severe predicament. We – As America, have the ability to

Although many states have investigated the effects of disqualify people with disabilities from jury service and made recommendations for law reforms in the area, apart from Western Australia, no state has taken active measures to implement the recommendations proposed. In Western Australia, people with disabilities are no longer automatically disqualified from jury service. The Western Australian courts have shown their willingness to allow people with disabilities to participate as juror by the recent case of Drisana Levitzke-Gray which captured the attention of many media outlets. The courts allowed Ms Levitzke-Gray, with the assistance of an Auslan interpreter to participate in the jury selection process. Although Ms Levitzke-Gray was not ultimately empanelled as part of the final jury, her experience is the first of its kind in Australia and has shown the courts willingness to provide accommodations to people who are capable for performing their democratic duties.

The Unites States is the most diverse country in the world. In this very culturally diverse nation one would automatically think that equality would exist. Realistically it does not, particularly in the Criminal Justice System. Racial Inequality in the Criminal Justice System results from the disparate treatment of correspondingly situated people grounded on race. The history of racial inequality in the Criminal Justice System in the United States has been age-old. With this country 's dishonorable past of slavery, the Jim Crow laws, and plentiful other racially established injustices, it seems apparent that race plays a factor in many aspects of the criminal justice system, such as who is more probable to come in contact with it and who is more likely to be incarcerated.

African American sentences and Caucasians sentences can be exceedingly contradistinctive. According to The Editorial Board, “Decades of research have shown that the criminal courts sentence black defendants more harshly than whites” (1). The Editorial Board is saying that there is a difference between sentencing. An individual’s race could determine their length of sentencing in the court system. Criminals whom act in identical offenses, no matter of their race, should be given the same sentencing. King reports, “Black men are given prison sentences 20% longer than white men for the exact same crime” (1). King’s argument is that minorities are given longer sentences, and that there is no equality between races. The court system discriminates against minorities by giving them longer sentences from Caucasians individuals who did the same crime. In her book, Are Cops Racist, McDonald advocates that “People in prison are not black or white they’re criminals” (7). In making this avocation, McDonald urges us to understand that criminals are criminals nonetheless of their race.

There has been a lot of research into the reasons that disparities and discrimination exist in the American judicial system, their inadequacies and what should be done if anything, to correct these deficiencies in the process. One particular area that seems to encompass both the disparities and discrimination in the American judicial system is the treatment of young black males in society. Statistics seem to reveal that more blacks commit more crime, and thus are singled out by profiling, and then subsequently incarcerated more