Juries are fundamental to our adversarial criminal justice process and Essay

Juries are fundamental to our adversarial criminal justice process and the only real guarantee of fairness between the State (as prosecutor) and the Individual - Essay Example In the case of a trial by jury, a decision is rendered by a group of nine individuals who may be drawn from different backgrounds, thereby bringing a depth of understanding of problems that single judges may not possess. According to Janata, â€Å"it is the mix of different persons with different backgrounds and psychological traits in the jury room that produces the desired results.† (Janata, 1976: 595-596). This feature may imbue juries with a greater ability to discern and make accurate determinations about the credibility of witnesses and the validity of arguments being offered, especially in criminal trials, especially because a jury is able to evaluate witnesses, plaintiffs and defendants from their perspective as ordinary citizens. Judges may sometimes get mired in the legal formalities and procedures to such an extent it may impede their intuitive judgments. There is also a greater possibility of bias arising when a single judge makes a decision on a case, particularly when it is a criminal case. In the case of a jury trial, the decision rendered is the cumulative effect of group deliberation, after the input and reflections from the different members comprising the jury are assimilated. Hence, a jury has the advantage of collective recall and weighing up of factors impacting upon a case. Since each fact is explored and discussed in a group, it allows a group scrutiny where bias is more likely to be eliminated than in the case of a single Judge. Jury trials have been advocated as an effective measure to bring justice to citizens, especially in criminal trials where jurors are believed to be better able to make assessments and judgments about character and believability of witnesses. Gastill and Weiser (2006) argue in favor of jury trials on the basis that being a part of a jury can spur greater levels of civil engagement from juror citizens and thereby provide a spur for real, deliberative democracy. While jurors do not make policy decisions, the