Transcript Document

Recommendations for
Changing Jury System
• Eliminate peremptory
challenges-Batson case
• Eliminate or restrict “voir
dire”
• Allow note-taking during
trial
• Allow for non-unanimous
verdicts
• Allow jurors to ask
questions
• Eliminate all
professional
exemptions
• Enforce jury
summonses
• Do not sequester or
request change of
venue simply because
of publicity
Batson v. Kentucky 106 S.Ct.
1712 (1986)


Petitioner claimed denied
equal protection (6th and
14th amendment) of the
law through State’s use of
peremptory challenges to
exclude members of his
race from jury
Previous cases held that
jury venire (pool) requires
a cross-section of
community but petit jury
itself did not



Ct held here that Equal
Protection Claude forbids
prosecutors to challenge
jurors solely on account of
their race
Burden is on defendant to
show that there is
purposeful discrimination
by prosecutor
Marshall concursperemptory challenges
should be abolished
Unanimous Verdict

Unanimous verdict has
stood as distinctive and
defining feature of jury
trials
 Prior to 1972, no case had
disputed unanimous
verdict
 Over 30 states today use
juries that are made up of
fewer than 12 but only
Louisiana and Oregon
authorize felony
convictions nonunanimous




Why unanimity so
important?-requires
consensus, reason and
disempowers prejudiceupholds Aristotelian ideal
of justice
Practically, more hung
juries
Studies show majority
verdicts leave jurors more
uncertain, factually vague
Unanimous verdicts
legitimize state’s coercive
power
Unanimous Verdicts (cont.)

In Brazil-jurors do not deliberate, vote
individually
 Non-unanimous verdicts would alter institutional
design of American jury
 Would no longer require jurors to approach justice
through conversation and persuasion
 Majority verdicts invites assertion of individual
beliefs and values over consensus model.
Jury Reforms (cont.)
• Reduce influence of professional jury
consultants-gives lawyers unfair partisan
advantage
• Make jury instructions more comprehensible
and give jurors copy in deliberation room
• Juries, as members of the community, as
peers, are essential to temper exercise of
potentially abusive power
Juries and Civil Disobedience
• Civil disobedience-acts of conscience which lead to
breaking the law to uphold ethical or moral
principles
• How do jurors evaluate these acts
• Jury nullification is an option where civil
disobedience is on trial
• Juries will ignore the law if find invalid/immoral
Jury Nullification
• Jurors have an inherent right to to set aside
instructions of the judge to reach a verdict
based on their own consciences and the
defendant has the right to have the jury so
instructed
How jurors evaluate acts of
civil disobedience
• Martin Luther King-
• “one who breaks an
unjust law must do so
– “one has not only a
legal responsibility but
openly, lovingly, and
a moral responsibility to
with a willingness to
obey just laws.
accept the penalty.”
Conversely, one has a
moral responsibility to
disobey unjust laws.”
Our Faltering Jury
• Jury system assures community participation
in law
• Vehicle for participation in democratic
society
• Jury verdicts have led to social unrest