by Sam E. Jones

Created on: September 09, 2010

One of the biggest problems with the American legal systems is that when crimes are committed, it comes down to a jury deciding whether the person the police have arrested is guilty of the crime. This is by far the weakest link in the whole system because juries are made up of human beings that are neither perfect, nor unbiased, which makes any decision they make about as far from perfect as one can imagine.

Yet, unfortunately, no one has come up with anything better; thus we continue to live with the way the system is, and that is with people that can be affected in many ways when trying to make up their minds about the guilt or innocence of the person that is standing trial.

One major factor that can affect a jury, or perhaps individual people that are sitting on that jury, is their background. People who live in high crime, low income areas for example, are notoriously more sympathetic to those on trial because they see for themselves how sometimes circumstances aren’t what they seem and how sometimes people can be driven to commit crimes due to their environment. Thus, they see no reason to send even those who are guilty to prison because they see the perpetuator as being a victim as well.

Another major thing that can affect juries is the personalities of some of the people that are sitting on that jury. Once the doors are closed, there is sometimes considerable pressure exerted on one or two holdouts, and quite often, those that are pressured succumb to that pressure and vote against their belief simply to avoid more pressure.

Juries are also affected of course by the lawyers presenting the case; both by their personalities and their ability to convince those people sitting on the jury that their arguments make the most sense.

Juries are also affected by the judges that preside over the case; some are more lax in following protocol, while others are more harsh. Also, some have a more stern demeanor that can intimidate some people which can have an impact on how they vote when the time comes.

Also, the facts in the case cannot be overlooked. In some instances there are a lot of good strong witnesses for example, with lots of physical evidence, and thus the work for the jury is pretty easy. Other times though, there is scant evidence, and little to no motive and so the lawyers have to work a lot harder to convince the people on the jury that they are right and the other side wrong. In these instances, quite often a verdict might be based more on a person’s gut feelings rather than actual facts, which is a prime example of why the system has some very glaring weaknesses.

Learn more about this author, Sam E. Jones.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.