query: how many jury members in a criminal trial

pos: Jury majority or supermajority. A jury that is unable to come to a verdict is referred to as a hung jury. The size of the jury varies; in criminal cases involving serious felonies there are usually 12 jurors. In civil cases many trials require fewer than twelve jurors. A grand jury, a type of jury now confined almost exclusively to federal courts and some state jurisdictions in the United States, determines whether there is enough evidence for a criminal trial to go forward. Grand juries carry out this duty by examining evidence presented to them by a prosecutor and issuing indictments,

pos: Jury majority or supermajority. A jury that is unable to come to a verdict is referred to as a hung jury. The size of the jury varies; in criminal cases involving serious felonies there are usually 12 jurors. In civil cases many trials require fewer than twelve jurors. A grand jury, a type of jury now confined almost exclusively to federal courts and some state jurisdictions in the United States, determines whether there is enough evidence for a criminal trial to go forward. Grand juries carry out this duty by examining evidence presented to them by a prosecutor and issuing indictments,

neg: Fact-finding and crimes against humanity which is carried out by the International Criminal Court. Professor Lyal S. Sunga discusses how UN human rights special procedures fact-finding can help the International Criminal Court find facts and how the two should be made complementary. Fact finders often have the job of determining what facts are available and their relevancy. The position of fact finder is determined by the type of proceeding. In a jury trial, it is the role of a jury in a jury trial. In a non-jury trial, the judge sits both as a fact-finder and as the trier of law.

neg: Jury nullification Jury nullification Jury nullification is a concept where members of a trial jury find a defendant not guilty if they do not support a government's law, do not believe it is constitutional or humane, or do not support a possible punishment for breaking the law. This may happen in both civil and criminal trials. In a criminal trial, a jury nullifies by acquitting a defendant, even though the members of the jury may believe that the defendant did commit the alleged crime. This may occur when members of the jury disagree with the law the defendant has been charged with

neg: Jury nullification to tell juries they can "nullify" a law. Organizations Articles and other works Jury nullification Jury nullification is a concept where members of a trial jury find a defendant not guilty if they do not support a government's law, do not believe it is constitutional or humane, or do not support a possible punishment for breaking the law. This may happen in both civil and criminal trials. In a criminal trial, a jury nullifies by acquitting a defendant, even though the members of the jury may believe that the defendant did commit the alleged crime. This may occur when members

neg: Jury trial Jury trial A jury trial, or trial by jury, is a lawful proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions. Jury trials are used in a significant share of serious criminal cases in almost all common law lawful systems (Singapore, for example, is an exception), and juries or lay judges have been incorporated into the legal systems of many civil law countries for criminal cases. Only the United States makes routine use of jury trials in a wide

neg: Greensboro massacre activism among mostly black textile industrial workers in the area. Two criminal trials of several Klan and ANP members were conducted: six men were prosecuted in a state criminal trial in 1980; five were charged with murder. All were acquitted by an all-white jury. A second, federal criminal civil rights trial in 1984 concluded with the acquittal of the nine defendants. In the first trial, the jury concluded that the defendants acted in self-defense. In the second trial, the jury concluded that the defendant's actions were based on political, rather than racial, motivations. Survivors filed a civil suit in 1980,

neg: R v Pan; R v Sawyer jury members had followed the first trial in the media and had consulted a doctor about the evidence. He had shared this information with the other members of the jury. Pan brought an application for a stay of the proceedings based on the information about the jury and challenged the constitutionality of section 649 of the "Criminal Code" which prohibited the use of evidence regarding the deliberation of the jury. The trial judge denied the application. Bradley Sawyer and a co-accused were convicted of assault. Prior to the sentencing one of the jury members contacted Sawyer and told him that

neg: Jury selection verdict. Part XX of the "Criminal Code of Canada" allows for a jury in a Canadian murder trial to consist of twelve jurors. However, a minimum of ten jurors and a maximum of 14 jurors may hear the evidence a trial. At the end of trial, a maximum of twelve jurors and minimum of ten jurors may deliberate. Section 631(2.2) as well as section 643 of the "Criminal Code" specify that a jury may consist of either 12, 13 or 14 members, however, 12 is most common. Section 631(2.2) allows a judge to order that 13 or 14 jurors be

neg: Jury trial study by Elisabeth Kolsky argues that many "perverse verdicts" were delivered by white juries in trial of "European British subjects" charged with murder, assault, confinement of Indians. In the Republic of Ireland, a common law jurisdiction, jury trials are available for criminal cases before the Circuit Court, Central Criminal Court and defamation cases, consisting of twelve jurors. Juries only decide questions of fact; they have no role in criminal sentencing in criminal cases or awarding damages in libel cases. It is not necessary that a jury be unanimous in its verdict. In civil cases, a verdict may be reached by

neg: Jury 75), although the trial may continue with as few as 9. The right to a jury trial has been enshrined in English law since Magna Carta in 1215, and is most common in serious cases, although the defendant can insist on a jury trial for most criminal cases. Jury trials in complex fraud cases have been described by some members and appointees of the Labour Party as expensive and time-consuming. In contrast, the Bar Council, Liberty and other political parties have supported the idea that trial by jury is at the heart of the judicial system and placed the blame

neg: Hong Kong criminal law for the Secretary for Justice to institute a criminal proceeding, the Secretary must first lawfully collect evidence and arrest the accused person. Then, the Secretary determines whether or not to institute a criminal proceeding; if he does so, he should also determine which court he should bring case to for formal hearing. See Arrest powers in Hong Kong See Summary Proceedings See Trial First Stage Similar to many former British colonies, Hong Kong inherits the practice of trial by jury from the UK. The precise process of empanelling a jury is provided in the Jury Ordinance. In general, a jury

neg: Trial consulting Trial consulting Trial consulting is the use of social scientists, particularly psychologists and communication experts, and economists, to aid attorneys in the presentation of a criminal trial or civil lawsuit. Modern trial consultants help prepare witnesses, improve arguments and rhetoric, and select juries. Although traditionally sophisticated jury selection methods were a mainstay of trial consultants, they now "place far less emphasis on jury selection than they did in the past", and many in the field now prefer the term "trial consulting" to "jury consulting". Since many cases are now settled out of court or decided by arbitration, some trial consulting

neg: Criminal Justice Act 2003 work intelligently." The Act introduced measures to permit trial without a jury in the specific cases of complex fraud (s.43) and jury tampering (s.44), though these provisions did not come into force on the passage of the Act. Section 43 of the Act sought to allow cases of serious or complex fraud to be tried without a jury if a judge was satisfied that: the complexity of the trial or the length of the trial (or both) is likely to make the trial so burdensome to the members of a jury hearing the trial that the interests of justice require

neg: Jury refusal to impanel more than the six members provided for by Florida law "did not violate petitioner's Sixth Amendment rights as applied to the States through the Fourteenth." In "Ballew v. Georgia", , the Supreme Court ruled that the number of jurors could not be reduced below six. In "Brownlee v The Queen" (2001) 207 CLR 278, the High Court of Australia unanimously held that a jury of 12 members was not an essential feature of "trial by jury" in section 80 of the Australian Constitution. In Scotland, a jury in a criminal trial consists of 15 jurors, which is

neg: Eddie Obeid trial the jury was discharged. In a subsequent criminal trial lasting just over three weeks, a jury found Obeid guilty of misconduct in public office. He was sentenced in December 2016 to five years in jail with a non-parole period of three years. In June 2017 before the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal, Obeid lodged an appeal against both his conviction and his sentence on the basis that he should not have stood trial in any court because breaches of the code of conduct governing NSW Members Parliament are within the exclusive cognisance or jurisdiction of Parliament, rather than the

neg: Jury trial criminal cases are not concluded with a jury verdict, but rather by plea bargain. Both prosecutors and defendants often have a strong interest in resolving the criminal case by negotiation resulting in a plea bargain. If the defendant waives a jury trial, a bench trial is held. For civil cases, a jury trial must be demanded within a certain period of time per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 38. In United States Federal courts, there is no absolute right to waive a jury trial. Per Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 23(a), only if the prosecution and the court consent may

neg: Grand jury county level. The system was so-called as the grand jurors had to present their public works proposals and budgets in court for official sanction by a judge. Grand jurors were usually the largest local payers of rates, and therefore tended to be the larger landlords, and on retiring they selected new members from the same background. Distinct from their public works function, as property owners they also were qualified to sit on criminal juries hearing trials by jury, as well as having a pre-trial judicial function for serious criminal cases. Many of them also sat as magistrates judging the less

neg: Juries in the United States a jury trial on a minor misdemeanor or traffic offense would actually have a right to "two" trials if they wanted a jury trial on the issue, first by bench trial only in District court, and then, if they lost, to a "trial de novo" in Circuit court, this time with a jury if they chose to do so. Many juvenile court systems do not recognize a right to jury trial, on the grounds that juvenile proceedings are civil rather than criminal, and that jury trials would cause the process to become adversarial. In the cases "Apprendi v. New Jersey",

neg: Jury trial variety of non-criminal cases. Other common law legal jurisdictions use jury trials only in a very select class of cases that make up a tiny share of the overall civil docket (like malicious prosecution and false imprisonment suits in England and Wales), but true civil jury trials are almost entirely absent elsewhere in the world. Some civil law jurisdictions, however, have arbitration panels where non-legally trained members decide cases in select subject-matter areas relevant to the arbitration panel members' areas of expertise. The availability of a trial by jury in American jurisdictions varies. Because the United States legal system separated

neg: Trial by jury in Scotland Trial by jury in Scotland Trial by jury in Scotland is used in the courts of Scotland in solemn procedure for trial on indictment before a judge and jury of fifteen for serious criminal cases, and in certain civil cases (mainly personal injury claims.) In criminal trials conviction is on the basis of a majority verdict, with eight jurors required to decide that the accused is guilty; should fewer than eight jurors declare a guilty verdict then the accused is acquitted. Thus, a hung jury is an impossibility in Scottish criminal law, but in civil trials a hung jury is

neg: Juries in the United States a person has committed a crime in order to put him or her on trial. If a grand jury decides there is enough evidence, the person is indicted. A grand jury has 16-23 members, and its proceedings are not open to the public. Unlike a petit jury, defendants and their attorneys do not have the right to appear before the grand jury. A petit jury, also known as a trial jury, is the standard type of jury used in criminal cases in the United States. Petit juries are responsible for deciding whether or not a defendant is guilty of violating

neg: Stephen Canessa provisions: Proponents tout the bill as a welcome and needed step toward reducing witness intimidation, especially by gang members awaiting trial. Family members of gang violence victims praised the bill, and many were present at the Massachusetts State House for its passage into law. The ACLU and the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers opposed sections of the bill that allow judges to bar defendants from seeing grand jury witness statements, and that reduce the requirements for a perjury conviction. Specifically, they point to a possible conflict with the 6th Amendment, which states in part: "In all criminal prosecutions, the

neg: Jury places, particularly the United States, to investigate whether enough evidence of a crime exists to bring someone to trial. The modern criminal court jury arrangement has evolved out of the medieval juries in England. Members were supposed to inform themselves of crimes and then of the details of the crimes. Their function was therefore closer to that of a grand jury than that of a jury in a trial. The word "jury" derives from Anglo-Norman "juré" ("sworn"). Juries are most common in common law adversarial-system jurisdictions. In the modern system, juries act as triers of fact, while judges act as

neg: Jury to make such findings unilaterally violates the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial. A similar Sixth Amendment argument in "Apprendi v. New Jersey", resulted in the Supreme Court's expansion of the requirement to all criminal cases, holding that "any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt". Many U.S. jurisdictions permit the seating of an advisory jury in a civil case in which there is no right to trial by jury to provide non-binding advice to the trial judge, although this procedural

neg: Jury is used. The use of a jury is optional for civil trials in any Australian state. The use of a jury in criminal trials is generally by a unanimous verdict of 12 lay members of the public. Some States provide exceptions such as majority (11-to-1 or 10-to-2) verdicts where a jury cannot otherwise reach a verdict. Sometimes a state law may allow an accused person to elect to use a judge-only trial rather than the default jury provision. The Constitution of Australia provides in section 80 that 'the trial on indictment of any offense against any law of the Commonwealth

neg: Jury trial thus: The Judgment on "Regina v Jones issued by the United Kingdom's Court of Appeal's (Criminal Division)" states, (in part, in Item 55) "... the issue has to be determined by looking at the way in which the courts handled the problem under English criminal procedure and by deciding whether, in the result, the appellant can be said to have had a fair hearing." Jury trial A jury trial, or trial by jury, is a lawful proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial in which a judge or

neg: Jury trial only criminal proceedings and some inquests are likely to be heard by a jury. The use of jury trials, which evolved within common law systems rather than civil law systems, has had a profound impact on the nature of American civil procedure and criminal procedure rules, even if a bench trial is actually contemplated in a particular case. In general, the availability of a jury trial if properly demanded has given rise to a system in which fact finding is concentrated in a single trial rather than multiple hearings, and appellate review of trial court decisions is greatly limited. Jury

neg: Tort reform to $1.2 billion by the judge. It is argued by some that extraordinary damage awards in the United States are a result of the jury system. In federal courts in the United States, the right to a jury trial in most civil cases is entrenched in the Seventh Amendment of the United States Constitution. Many state constitutions have similar clauses to protect the right to a jury trial in state court proceedings. In many countries, particularly in continental Europe, juries are not used at all even in criminal cases due to the cost of protracted trials necessitated with a jury

neg: Juries in the United States handed down in bench trials. In United States Federal courts, there is no absolute right to waive a jury trial. Per Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23(a), only if the prosecution and the court consent may a defendant have a waiver of jury trial. However, most states give the defendant the absolute right to waive a jury trial. The right to a jury trial is exclusively that of the criminal defendant; where one has the right to waive a jury trial, and does so, the prosecution cannot ask for one. In "Patton v. United States", one of the jurors became

neg: Black v The Queen (1993) It additionally found that the jury must be free to deliberate without any pressure been brought upon them. The Court quashed the conviction, set aside the decision of the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal and ordered a new trial. In Australian law, a "Black direction" is a direction by a judge to a jury to reconsider the votes of a small number of jury members. In Queensland, a judge may make a "Black direction" to a jury. Black v The Queen (1993) Black v The Queen is a decision of High Court of Australia. In the first trial,

neg: Bench trial examples cited included the United States, the Commonwealth of Nations including India and Canada, the British overseas territories of the Falkland Islands and St. Helena, and the Netherlands. In U.S. law, for most criminal cases, trial by jury is usually a matter of course as it is a constitutional right under the Sixth Amendment and cannot be waived without certain requirements. Under section 21 of the rules of Federal Criminal Procedure, if a defendant is entitled to a jury trial, the trial must be by jury unless (1) the defendant waives a jury trial in writing, (2) the government consents,

neg: Jury trial findings of fact and removed them to prison until the fine was paid. Edward Bushel, a member of the jury, nonetheless refused to pay the fine. Bushel petitioned the Court of Common Pleas for a writ of "habeas corpus". The ruling in the "Bushel's Case" was that a jury could not be punished simply on account of the verdict it returned. Many British colonies, including the United States, adopted the English common law system in which trial by jury is an important part. Jury trials in criminal cases were a protected right in the original United States Constitution and the

neg: Trial to a trial held before a jury. Because the state is attempting to use its power to deprive the accused of life, liberty, or property, the rights of the accused afforded to criminal defendants are typically broad. The rules of criminal procedure provide rules for criminal trials. A civil trial is generally held to settle lawsuits or civil claims—non-criminal disputes. In some countries, the government can both sue and be sued in a civil capacity. The rules of civil procedure provide rules for civil trials. Although administrative hearings are not ordinarily considered trials, they retain many elements found in more

neg: Wainwright v. Witt trial involving capital punishment. These standards have been researched, criticized, and even brought back to Supreme Court as evident in "Lockhart v. McCree" (1986) and "Uttecht v. Brown" (2007). No matter how many appeals get brought to the Supreme Court, they still back the same standards set by Witt over 25 years ago. These standards laid down the foundations and guidelines on how we choose a death qualified jury to this day. Witt was executed the next day, March 6, 1985. Wainwright v. Witt Wainwright vs. Witt, 470 U.S. 1039 (1985), was a U.S. Supreme Court case concerning a criminal

neg: Lockerbie: The Story and the Lessons Flight 103, and details how the civil litigation developed so many of the facts surrounding the bombing for the first time. Wallis's book uncovers the fundamental weaknesses in Pan Am's communication and corporate security management policies which created an environment where good aviation security was impossible. The government's unusual role in protecting sensitive aviation security information that was introduced at trial is also described. The jury eventually found defendant Pan American Airways liable for "willful misconduct." The criminal trial was held in 2000 at a specially convened Scottish Court in the Netherlands. Two Libyans were accused of carrying out the

neg: Jury trial tried by magistrates or the defendant may elect trial by jury in the Crown Court. Serious ("indictable") offences, however, must be tried before a jury in the Crown Court. Juries sit in few civil cases, being restricted to false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and civil fraud (unless ordered otherwise by a judge). Juries also sit in coroner's courts for more contentious inquests. All criminal juries consist of 12 jurors, those in a County Court having 8 jurors and Coroner's Court juries having between 7 and 11 members. Jurors must be between 18–75 years of age, and are selected at random from

neg: Jury trial a defendant waive a jury trial for criminal cases. However, most states give the defendant the absolute right to waive a jury trial, and it has become commonplace to find such a waiver in routine contracts as a 2004 "Wall Street Journal" Article states: "For years, in an effort to avoid the slow-moving wheels of the U.S. judicial system, many American companies have forced their customers and employees to agree to settle disputes outside of the courts, through private arbitration... but the rising cost of arbitration proceedings has led some companies to decide they might be better off in the

neg: Jury trial deliberation were to occur. Austria, in common with a number of European civil law jurisdictions, retains elements of trial by jury in serious criminal cases. Belgium, in common with a number of European civil law jurisdictions, retains the trial by jury through the Court of Assize for serious criminal cases and for political crimes and for press delicts (except those based on racism or xenophobia), and for crimes of international law, such as genocide and crime against humanity. Under Canadian law, a person has the constitutional right to a jury trial for all crimes punishable by five years of imprisonment

neg: History of trial by jury in England 1920. History of trial by jury in England The history of trial by jury in England is influential because many English and later British colonies adopted the English common law system in which trial by jury plays an important part. Many traditions, such as the number of members being twelve, originated in England. According to George Macaulay Trevelyan in "A Shortened History of England" (1958), during the Viking occupation: “The Scandinavians, when not on the Viking warpath, were a litigious people and loved to get together in the 'thing' to hear legal argument. They had no professional lawyers, but many

neg: History of trial by jury in England History of trial by jury in England The history of trial by jury in England is influential because many English and later British colonies adopted the English common law system in which trial by jury plays an important part. Many traditions, such as the number of members being twelve, originated in England. According to George Macaulay Trevelyan in "A Shortened History of England" (1958), during the Viking occupation: “The Scandinavians, when not on the Viking warpath, were a litigious people and loved to get together in the 'thing' to hear legal argument. They had no professional lawyers, but many of

neg: Jury trial members, though fewer may sit on cases involving lesser offenses. Criminal juries decide whether the defendant committed the crime as charged. In several southern states, the jury sets punishment, while in most states and at the federal level, it is set by the judge. Verdicts in criminal cases must be unanimous, with the following exceptions: Currently, two states, Oregon and Louisiana, do not require unanimous verdicts in criminal cases. Each requires a 10–2 majority for conviction, except for capital crimes: Oregon requires unanimous verdicts for guilty to any murder case and Louisiana requires all 12. But in Oregon, unlike any

neg: Jury trial or more. The Criminal Code also provides for the right to a jury trial for most indictable offences, including those punishable by less than five years' imprisonment, though the right is only constitutionally enshrined for those offences punishable by five years' imprisonment or more. Generally, it is the accused person who is entitled to elect whether their trial will proceed by judge alone or by judge and jury; however, for the most severe criminal offences—murder, treason, alarming Her Majesty, intimidating Parliament, inciting to mutiny, sedition, and piracy—trial by jury is mandatory unless the prosecution consents to trial by judge alone.

neg: Jury trial trial shall be held in the State where the offence was committed, and if the offence was not committed within any State the trial shall be held at such place or places as the Parliament prescribes." The first trials by civilian juries of 12 in the colony of New South Wales were held in 1824, following a decision of the NSW Supreme Court on 14 October 1824. The NSW Constitution Act of 1828 effectively terminated trial by jury for criminal matters. Jury trials for criminal matters revived with the passing of the Jury Trials Amending Act of 1833 (NSW) (2

neg: Jury trial such cases. Under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, if the defendant is entitled to a jury trial, he may waive his right to have a jury, but both the government (prosecution) and court must consent to the waiver. Several states require jury trials for all crimes, "petty" or not. In the cases "Apprendi v. New Jersey", , and "Blakely v. Washington", , the Supreme Court of the United States held that a criminal defendant has a right to a jury trial not only on the question of guilt or innocence, but any fact used to increase the defendant's sentence

neg: Trial by jury in Scotland then take the oath collectively and swear by "almighty God" without using any religious text. Those who prefer to affirm then do so collectively. Trial by jury in Scotland Trial by jury in Scotland is used in the courts of Scotland in solemn procedure for trial on indictment before a judge and jury of fifteen for serious criminal cases, and in certain civil cases (mainly personal injury claims.) In criminal trials conviction is on the basis of a majority verdict, with eight jurors required to decide that the accused is guilty; should fewer than eight jurors declare a guilty verdict

neg: Grady O'Malley longest federal criminal trial in the nation's history. All 19 defendants in the trial were acquitted after the jury deliberated for 14 hours. Five years later in 2003, Michael Taccetta and Michael Perna, who of the lead defendants in the trial, pleaded guilty to jury tampering in the Accetturo trial, along with other violations. For the remaining two years of the 1980s, O'Malley continued to charge and convict many of the defendants who were acquitted during the Accetturo trial on other charges, eventually convicting every one of the acquitted defendants. This trial is the subject of the 2006 American film

neg: Writ of attaint Writ of attaint A writ of attaint is an obsolete writ in English law, issued to inquire whether a jury had given a false verdict in a trial. In criminal cases, the writ of attaint was issued at the suit of the Crown, and in civil cases at the suit of either party. The correctness of the verdict would be determined by a body known as the grand jury of attaint. This panel, consisting of twenty-four members, was twice the size of a normal trial jury. The party bringing the attaint could introduce only the same evidence that was originally

neg: Jury trial by judge and jury in a superior court; summary offences cannot be tried by jury. In the United States, because jury trials tend to be high profile, the general public tends to overestimate the frequency of jury trials. Approximately 150,000 jury trials are conducted in state courts annually, and an additional 5,000 jury trials are conducted in federal courts. Two thirds of jury trials are criminal trials, while one-third are civil and "other" (e.g., family, municipal ordinance, traffic). Nevertheless, the vast majority of criminal cases are settled by plea bargain, which removes the need for a jury trial. Some commentators

neg: R v W (D) in the instruction of jury members on the burden of proof in a criminal case, the fact that the trial judge correctly instructed the jury on that issue elsewhere in the charge is a strong indication that the jury were not in fact left in doubt as to the burden resting on the Crown. As Sopinka J. dissented, credibility is a fundamental issue. When dealing with the burden of proof, the trial judge is dealing with the most fundamental rule of the legal game. It is especially important that it be very clear and unequivocal that the prosecution has not

neg: Criminal law of Canada in the superior court. At this stage the trial court has all the authority to determine matters such as bail, preliminary motions, trial matters and the verdict. If the trial is by judge and jury, the jury has the ultimate authority to render a verdict but the trial judge has the authority over bail, pretrial motions and jury instructions. If the accused is found guilty the trial judge must determine a fit sentence. See Criminal sentencing in Canada. Where the trial is by judge alone, the judge will determine all facts which were proven and allow the parties to adduce

neg: Trial of Susan B. Anthony Reconstruction, the competing authority of federal and state governments and courts, criminal proceedings in federal courts, the right to trial by jury and the lack of provisions to appeal criminal convictions." She said that, "Justice Hunt's decision to direct the jury to find Anthony guilty—without allowing the jurors to deliberate and without polling them—was so egregious that lawyers, politicians and the press spoke out against his violation of the constitutional guarantee of trial by jury." She also said, "Anthony's role in providing impetus for protecting a defendant's rights in jury trials should not be overlooked." Trial of Susan B. Anthony

neg: Trial by jury in Scotland of potential jurors is chosen purely at random, and Scottish courts have set themselves against any form of jury vetting. During World War II the Administration of Justice (Emergency Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1939 provided that both civil and criminal juries would have seven members, of whom two would be "special members", except for trials for treason or murder, or where a case in the High Court of Justiciary required the regular jury of fifteen on the "gravity of matters in issue". The rules of eligibility for jury service are broadly similar to England, but people with legal experience (such as

neg: Law & Order: Trial by Jury Law & Order: Trial by Jury Law & Order: Trial by Jury is an American television drama about criminal trials set in New York City. It was the fourth series in Dick Wolf's successful "Law & Order" franchise. The show's almost exclusive focus was on the criminal trial of the accused, showing both the prosecution's and defense's preparation for trial, as well as the trial itself. The series premiered on Thursday, March 3, 2005, and ended on January 21, 2006. Its regular time slot was Fridays 10/9 p.m. ET on NBC. The last episode aired on Court TV months after

neg: Trial of George Zimmerman In Florida, juries consist of six people; 12 jurors are required only for criminal trials involving capital cases, where the death penalty is applicable. Zimmerman's jury consisted of six members and four alternatives. During the fourth day of jury selection, Judge Nelson announced that the jury would be sequestered during the trial, which was expected to take two to four weeks. On June 18, 2013, forty potential jurors made it past the initial screening process: 16 men and 24 women. The defense struck one potential juror, a female African American, as a "stealth juror" for failing to disclose that her

neg: Human rights in Argentina criminal charges. During the investigative stage, defendants can submit questions in writing to the investigating judge. A panel of judges decides guilt or innocence. Federal and provincial courts continued the transition to trials with oral arguments in criminal cases, replacing the old system of written submissions. Although the 1994 constitution provides for trial by jury, implementing legislation had not been passed by year's end. In Cordoba Province, however, defendants accused of certain serious crimes have the right to a trial by jury. Lengthy delays in trials are a nationwide problem, with many cases taking five or more years to resolve.

neg: History of United States prison systems dismiss the case or bind the accused over to the Superior Court for a grand jury hearing. (Some cases, however, particularly those involving moral offenses like drinking and gambling, were initiated by the grand jury of its own accord.) Criminal procedure in the antebellum rural South offered many avenues of escape to a criminal defendant, and only the poorest resided in the jail while awaiting trial or sentencing. Those defendants who did spend time in jail before trial had to wait for the prosecutor's biannual visit to their county. Southern prosecutors generally did not live in the local area where

neg: Jury trial in that issue." Jury determination of questions of law, sometimes called jury nullification, cannot be overturned by a judge if doing so would violate legal protections against double jeopardy. Although a judge can throw out a guilty verdict if it was not supported by the evidence, a jurist has no authority to override a verdict that favors a defendant. It was established in Bushel's Case that a judge cannot order the jury to convict, no matter how strong the evidence is. In civil cases a special verdict can be given, but in criminal cases a general verdict is rendered, because

neg: Lay judges in Japan to serve as jury members, many Japanese have expressed reluctance to serve as lay judges. Polls suggest that, similar to developed jury systems, 70% of the population of Japan would be reluctant to serve as judges. Some Japanese have been introduced to mock trials over recent years to overcome their reluctance to express opinions publicly, debate, and defy authority figures. Others have written with concern regarding the harsh secrecy provision in the statute which includes the risk of criminal penalties for those lay judges who would publicly share confidential deliberation room discussion even after trial proceedings are complete. Another issue

neg: Jury trial Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments of the U.S. Constitution extend the rights to trial by jury to include the right to jury trial for both criminal and civil matters and a grand jury for serious cases. Some jurisdictions with jury trials allow the defendant to waive their right to a jury trial, thus leading to a bench trial. Jury trials tend to occur only when a crime is considered serious. In some jurisdictions, such as France and Brazil, jury trials are reserved, and compulsory, for the most severe crimes and are not available for civil cases. In Brazil, for example,

neg: Trial of Saddam Hussein in trial proceedings by the removal of a judge mid-trial, exclusion of members of the defense team at points in the trial, assassination of multiple members of the defence team, and the closure of the trial before the defence team had completed presenting its legal case. In the opening statement of the Jury of Conscience of the World Tribunal on Iraq, keynote speaker Arundhati Roy retorted, "Saddam Hussein is being tried as a war criminal even as we speak. But what about those who helped to install him in power, who armed him, who supported him—and who are now setting

neg: Jury trial are often seen as an important check against state power. Other common assertions about the benefits of trial by jury is that it provides a means of interjecting community norms and values into judicial proceedings and that it legitimizes the law by providing opportunities for citizens to validate criminal statutes in their application to specific trials. Alexis de Tocqueville also claimed that jury trials educate citizens about self-government. Many also believe that a jury is likely to provide a more sympathetic hearing, or a fairer one, to a party who is not part of the government—or other establishment interest—than would

neg: History of trial by jury in England 5 July 1641 repeats the clause on the right of a citizen to be judged by his peers: Abolition of the Star Chamber<br> "An act for the regulating of the privy council, and for taking away the court commonly called the star-chamber. Many English colonies, including the Thirteen Colonies, which later became the United States, adopted the jury trial system. In 1670 two Quakers charged with unlawful assembly, William Penn and William Mead, were found not guilty at the Central Criminal Court at the Old Bailey by a jury. The judge then imprisoned the jury without food, water, heat, or

neg: Jury trial the United States is that verdicts in criminal cases must be unanimous. Every person accused of a crime punishable by incarceration for more than six months has a constitutionally protected right to a trial by jury, which arises in federal court from Article Three of the United States Constitution, which states in part, "The Trial of all Crimes...shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed." The right was expanded with the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states in part, "In all criminal prosecutions, the

neg: Bench trial are usually faster than jury trials because of the fewer formalities required. For example, there is no jury selection phase and no need for sequestration and jury instructions. A bench trial (whether criminal or civil) that is presided over by a judge has some distinctive characteristics, but it is basically the same as a jury trial, only without the jury. For example, the rules of evidence and methods of objection are the same in a bench trial as in a jury trial. Bench trials, however, are frequently more informal than jury trials. It is often less necessary to protect the

neg: Robert E. Trono four city council members. He also successfully prosecuted many violent drug enterprises, including thirty members of a gang responsible for over twenty murders. Trono served as a state prosecutor in multiple positions in Richmond, VA. During his time as a state prosecutors, Trono prosecuted a wide variety of major felony cases and served as the lead prosecutor in more than 130 jury trials. While in Richmond, Trono was an adjunct professor at the University of Richmond School of Law and was a frequent lecturer on trial tactics and criminal justice matters. Trono attended the University of Richmond (B.S. in Business

neg: Jury trial Jury panel exhaustion Criminal Code Section 642(1): If a full jury and alternate jurors cannot be provided, the court may order the sheriff or other proper officer, at the request of the prosecutor, to summon without delay as many people as the court directs for the purpose of providing a full jury and alternate jurors. Section 642(2): Jurors may be summoned under subsection (1) by word of mouth, if necessary. Section 642(3): The names of the people who are summoned under this Section shall be added to the general panel for the purposes of the trial, and the same proceedings

neg: WAAKE-UP! resistance techniques as well as the benefit of practice with friends to "squoosh" the pie in Byyny's face without harming him. The jury found that she was not guilty of assault but did find her guilty of harassment and criminal mischief. Toombs was sentenced to six months of unsupervised probation, thirty hours of community service, and was ordered to write Byyny a letter of apology. The verdict was considered a victory by Toombs, her attorneys, and her supporters. Before the trial WAAKE-UP! members staged a "sui-pied", a demonstration where they hit themselves in the face with pies to show how

neg: Summary offence against summarily, and without a jury". These include criminal citations. Any crime punishable by more than six months of imprisonment must have some means for a jury trial. Some states, such as California, provide that all common law crimes and misdemeanors require a jury trial. Some states provide that in all offenses the defendant may demand a jury trial. (Note that the right to trial by jury is the exclusive right of the defendant, if the defendant chooses to select a bench trial (trial by judge) the prosecution cannot object.) Contempt of court is considered a prerogative of the court,

neg: Jury small claims cases. The civil jury in the United States is a defining element of the process by which personal injury trials are handled. In practice, even though the defendant in a criminal action is entitled to a trial by jury, most criminal actions in the U.S. are resolved by plea bargain. Only about 2% of civil cases go to trial, with only about half of those trials being conducted before juries. In 1898 the Supreme Court held that the jury must be composed of at least twelve persons, although this was not necessarily extended to state civil jury trials.

neg: Judiciary of Sweden cases and other cases concerning offenses against freedom of the press. Unless the parties agree to waive a jury trial, the question of whether or not the printed material falls outside permissible limits is submitted to a jury of nine members. In these cases, six of the nine jurors must find against the defendant, and may not be overruled in cases of acquittal. Sweden has no tradition of using juries in most types of criminal or civil trial. The most frequently prosecuted offence under this act is defamation, although in total eighteen offences, including high treason and espionage, are covered.

neg: Continuing Criminal Enterprise Wienberg, and Richard Martinez and Falcon was represented by Albert Krieger, Susan Van Dusen, and D. Robert "Bobby" Wells. Following the trial, the United States Attorney's Office directed an investigation into Magluta and Falcon's finances that ultimately revealed that members of their jury - including the jury foreman - had been bribed. Magluta, Falcon, several of the jurors, their associates and even some of their lawyers were ultimately charged with various criminal offenses arising from the conduct. Magluta was eventually sentenced to 205 years in federal prison, while Falcon received only 20 years after striking a plea deal with the

neg: Jury trial previously practised in Hong Kong shall be maintained." Criminal trials in the High Court are by jury. The juries are generally made of seven members, who can return a verdict based on a majority of five. There are no jury trials in the District Court, which can impose a sentence of up to seven years' imprisonment. This is despite the fact that all court rooms in the District Court have jury boxes. The lack of juries in the District Court has been severely criticized. Clive Grossman SC in a commentary in 2009 said conviction rates were "approaching those of North

neg: MS-13 Attorney's Office for the Western District of North Carolina, and Trial Attorney Sam Nazzaro from the Criminal Division's Gang Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Don Gast and Adam Morris of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of North Carolina were also members of the government's trial team. Charges included: On April 19, 2010, the jury convicted Umaña of all charges, and additionally found him responsible for the 2005 murders during the sentencing phase. On April 28, a 12-person federal jury in Charlotte voted unanimously to impose the death penalty. On July 27, 2010, Chief U.S. District Judge Robert J.

neg: Insanity defense under 14, were spared trial by ordeal. When trial by jury replaced this, the jury members were expected to find the insane guilty but then refer the case to the King for a Royal Pardon. From 1500 onwards, juries could acquit the insane, and detention required a separate civil procedure (Walker, 1985). The Criminal Lunatics Act 1800, passed with retrospective effect following the acquittal of James Hadfield, mandated detention at the regent's pleasure (indefinitely) even for those who, although insane at the time of the offence, were now sane. The M'Naghten Rules of 1843 were not a codification or definition

neg: Duncan v. Louisiana from the Louisiana State Supreme Court. Do the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to jury trial in state prosecutions where sentences as long as two years may be imposed. Justice White noted that the right to a jury trial for criminal offenses is a deeply enshrined value in the British and American legal traditions. Thus, right to a jury trial in criminal cases is within the 14th Amendment and so is applicable to the states. The question for the court was whether an offense subject to two years' imprisonment is a "serious offense." The majority noted that at

neg: History of trial by jury in England to as "Bushel's Case", and is a landmark case that established beyond question the independence of the jury in the English legal system. There is a plaque on the wall of the Old Bailey to this effect, praising the courage and endurance of Bushel and the other jurymen. Jury trials in criminal cases were a protected right in the original US Constitution. The Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments of the U.S. Constitution extended the rights to trial by jury to both criminal and civil matters, and a grand jury for serious cases. Women first served on juries in England in

neg: Jury trial accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed." Both provisions were made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Most states' constitutions also grant the right of trial by jury in lesser criminal matters, though most have abrogated that right in offenses punishable by fine only. The Supreme Court has ruled that if imprisonment is for six months or less, trial by jury is not required, meaning a state may choose whether or not to permit trial by jury in

neg: Trial by jury in Scotland possible. Some people were executed on majority verdicts in Scotland, such as Susan Newell, who had one juror dissenting. Criminal procedure in Scotland is generally regulated by the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 (as amended) and various Acts of Adjournal passed by the High Court of Justiciary. Under Scots law a jury in a criminal trial must have at least fifteen jurors for a case to continue, and at least eight jurors must declare guilt into order to convict. The jury has a choice of three verdicts: guilty (a conviction), not guilty (acquittal) and not proven (also acquittal). The pool

neg: Trial by Jury members of the Jury, and a number of other famous actors and actresses were in the chorus. Sullivan also conducted the 1889 benefit for Barrington. At the Nellie Farren benefit, many of the performers listed below sat in the jury or the gallery, and "Trial by Jury" was followed by a six-hour-long concert. Performances were given by Henry Irving, Ellaline Terriss, Marie Tempest, Hayden Coffin, Arthur Roberts, Letty Lind, Edmund Payne and many others. The Ellen Terry benefit in 1906 was also a particularly well-attended affair, with Sir Arthur Conan Doyle numbered among the jury and Enrico Caruso singing, among

neg: Jury trial and custody modifications. Only eleven states allow juries in any aspect of divorce litigation (Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin). Most of these limit the right to a jury to try issues regarding grounds or entitlement for divorce only. Texas provides jury trial rights most broadly, including even the right to a jury trial on questions regarding child custody. However, anyone who is charged with a criminal offense, breach of contract or federal offence has a Constitutional right to a trial by jury. "In the United States, a civil action is a

neg: Juries in the United States the event of a hung jury, charges against the defendant are not dropped and can be reinstated if the state so chooses. In the federal system, a unanimous verdict is required. The vast majority of U.S. criminal cases are not concluded with a jury verdict, but rather by plea bargain. Both prosecutors and defendants often have a strong interest in resolving the criminal case by negotiation resulting in a plea bargain. If the defendant waives a jury trial, a bench trial is held. Research indicates there is not a consistent difference between penalties handed down in jury trials and those

neg: Dunlop v R girl. The girl testified at trial that the two teens had participated in the rape. The trial judge directed the jury to find whether the teens had participated enough to have aided or abetted the rape under section 21(1) of the "Criminal Code" or had a common intention to rape the victim under section 21(2) of the "Criminal Code". Justice Dickson wrote the decision for the majority. He held that the trial judge had erred in instructing the jury to consider the "common intention" provision of the Criminal Code. The sole issue was whether the teens had aided and abetted

neg: Jury tampering Judge, allowing the first-ever criminal trial to be held without a jury by invoking Section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The case in question involved four men accused of an armed robbery at Heathrow Airport in February 2004. After three juries either failed to reach verdicts or were discharged, the fourth trial of the case took place before a single judge, and ended on 31 March 2010 with guilty verdicts for all four accused. The UK had previously established non-jury courts in Northern Ireland, known as Diplock Courts. Levels of jury tampering were reported in 2002 to be

neg: History of trial by jury in England introduced what is now known as the "grand jury", through his Grand Assize. Under the assize, a jury of free men was charged with reporting any crimes that they knew of in their hundred to a "justice in eyre," a judge who moved between hundreds on a circuit. A criminal accused by this jury was given a trial by ordeal. Under the jury, the chances of being found guilty were much lower, as the king did not choose verdict (or punishment). The Church banned participation of clergy in trial by ordeal in 1215. Without the legitimacy of religion, trial by

neg: All-white jury could make a "prima facie" case for purposeful racial discrimination in jury selection by relying on the record and that a State denies a defendant equal protection in a trial before a jury from which members of his race have been purposely excluded. "Batson" did not eliminate the exclusion of blacks from juries. "Batson" applied only in criminal trials, only to prosecutors, and only in situations where the challenged juror and the defendant were of the same race. The Mississippi Supreme Court noted, in reversing a 2004 murder conviction of a black man, where prosecutors used all 15 of their

neg: Wisconsin circuit courts or criminal case are similar. Both may be to a jury or judge. Both start with opening statements, proceed to presentation of evidence followed by closing statements, and culminate with a decision. Depending on the result of the trial, a civil case may end with the awarding of damages and a criminal trial may end with sentencing. During the trial, the role of the judge is similar – determining the admissibility of evidence, guiding the jury, if there is one, and refereeing the actions of the attorneys. Wisconsin circuit courts Circuit courts are the general trial courts in the state

neg: Jury trial the register of voters. In the past an unanimous verdict was required. This has been changed so that, if the jury fails to agree after a given period, at the discretion of the judge they may reach a verdict by a 10-2 majority. This was designed to make it more difficult for jury tampering to succeed. In 1999 the then Home Secretary Jack Straw introduced a controversial bill to limit the right to trial by jury. This became the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which sought to remove the right to trial by jury for cases involving jury tampering or complex

neg: Jury research embedded in the wider communities in which they have evolved. "Although the role of juries and jurors has a somewhat chequered history, 'the jury, in one form or the other, became the formal method of proof of the guilt or [otherwise] of a person on trial, and juries remain one of the 'cornerstones' of the criminal justice system in many countries. There are however, many debates about the efficacy of the jury system and the ability of jurors to adequately determine the guilt or otherwise of the accused. Some argue that lay individuals are incapable of digesting the often complex

neg: Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution the "historical test", which interpreted the amendment as relying on English common law to determine whether a jury trial was necessary in a civil suit. The amendment thus does not guarantee trial by jury in cases under maritime law, in lawsuits against the government itself, and for many parts of patent claims. In all other cases, the jury can be waived by consent of the parties. The amendment additionally guarantees a minimum of six members for a jury in a civil trial. The amendment's twenty dollar threshold has not been the subject of much scholarly or judicial writing; that threshold

neg: Jury trial lawsuit; civil law is the branch of common law dealing with non-criminal actions. It should not be confused with legal system of civil law." The right to trial by jury in a civil case in federal court is addressed by the Seventh Amendment. Importantly, however, the Seventh Amendment does not guarantee a right to a civil jury trial in state courts (although most state constitutions guarantee such a right). The Seventh Amendment provides: "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried

neg: Criminal Law Act 1827 in a standard exchange with the clerk of the court: "How wilt thou be tried?" "By God and my country." "God grant thee a good deliverance." By this process, the prisoner elected jury trial rather than trial by ordeal: however, as trial by ordeal had been officially abolished by a statute of Henry III in 1219, the prisoner in fact had no choice to make. Part I of the 1827 act removed the requirement for this formality. Historically, prisoners who refused to plead to an indictment were tortured, in a process known as "peine fort et dure", until they died

neg: 2007 New Zealand police raids to prejudice a fair trial of the accused." On 13 February 2012, the trial for the remaining four defendants began in the Auckland High Court. At the request of the defendants the trial was heard before a jury. In the court the prosecution said the four persons on trial were the ringleaders of the organised criminal group which trained for months to take military action against civilian targets in their cause for an independent Tuhoe nation, with Tame Iti as leader. The jury was unable to agree on a verdict for the major charge of belonging to an organised criminal

neg: Jury murder (but the judge is not bound by the jury's recommendation, and the jury is not required to make a recommendation). Jury selection is in accordance with specific criteria. Prospective jurors may only be asked certain questions, selected for direct pertinence to impartiality or other relevant matters. Any other questions must be approved by the judge. A jury in a criminal trial is initially composed of 12 jurors. The trial judge has the discretion to direct that one or two alternate jurors also be appointed. If a juror is discharged during the course of the trial, the trial will continue

neg: Jury trial or more. For most offences, the defendant can choose to forego a jury trial in favour of a judge-alone (bench) trial. Serious "category 4" offences such as murder, manslaughter and treason are always tried by jury, with some exceptions. Civil jury trials are restricted to cases involving defamation, false imprisonment or malicious prosecution. New Zealand previously required jury verdicts to be passed unanimously, but since the passing of the Criminal Procedure Bill in 2009 the Juries Act 1981 has permitted verdicts to be passed by a majority of one less than the full jury (that is an 11–1 or a

neg: Trial consulting firms have diversified to include mock mediation and arbitration sessions. This is also the reason that many jury/trial consultants are now referring to themselves as "litigation consultants". The traditional mainstays of trial consulting remain important. They include witness preparation, shadow juries, mock trials, focus groups, community attitude surveys, and expert assistance with trial presentation. Trial consulting Trial consulting is the use of social scientists, particularly psychologists and communication experts, and economists, to aid attorneys in the presentation of a criminal trial or civil lawsuit. Modern trial consultants help prepare witnesses, improve arguments and rhetoric, and select juries. Although traditionally sophisticated

neg: Mass Transit incident (professional wrestling) identification. The story was completed before the Kulases launched their lawsuit, so key details of how Kulas actually got himself into the match had not been made public at that point. Three years after the incident, Jerome "New Jack" Young was tried on charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and was later sued by the Kulas family. After hearing about Erich Kulas' request to New Jack to blade him, a jury acquitted Young of all charges in the criminal trial, and he was later declared not liable in the civil trial. Performers who testified at Young's trial

neg: Henriette Caillaux and she was formally charged upon reaching the headquarters. Gaston Calmette died six hours after being shot. Henriette Caillaux's trial dominated French public life. It featured a deposition from the president of the Republic, an unheard-of occurrence at a criminal proceeding almost anywhere, along with the fact that many of the participants were among the most powerful members of French society. She was defended by the prominent attorney Fernand Labori who convinced the jury that her crime, which she did not deny, was not a premeditated act but that her uncontrollable female emotions resulted in a crime of passion. The

neg: Jury composed of fifteen residents. In criminal law in federal courts and a minority of state court systems of the United States, a grand jury is convened to hear only testimony and evidence to determine whether there is a sufficient basis for deciding to indict the defendant and proceed toward trial. In each court district where a grand jury is required, a group of 16–23 citizens holds an inquiry on criminal complaints brought by the prosecutor to decide whether a trial is warranted (based on the standard that probable cause exists that a crime was committed), in which case an indictment

neg: Indictment the offense. Each offense usually is set out in a separate "count". Indictments for complex crimes, particularly those involving conspiracy or numerous counts, may run to hundreds of pages. However, in other cases an indictment for a crime as serious as murder, may consist of a single sheet of paper. Indictable offenses are normally tried by jury, unless the accused waives the right to a jury trial. Although the Sixth Amendment mandates the right to a jury trial in any criminal prosecution, the vast majority of criminal cases in the United States are resolved by the plea-bargaining process. A direct

neg: Jesse Binga their payments after their members lost their jobs. Binga refused to seize the properties of these community institutions and in June 1930 the Auditor General of the State of Illinois closed the bank down. Binga lost his personal fortune as well as that of many depositors. As soon as the bank was closed down, Binga's activities were investigated, leading to criminal charges. He was indicted in March 1931 for embezzlement. The prosecution argued that Binga took out inadequately secured loans to speculate in real estate, but his first trial in 1932 ended in a hung jury. He was then charged