The History of the US Jury System is Important. One of the More Beneficial Components of Our Existing Government is a Court System That is Fair “in Theory”.

The history of the US jury system shows that justice is dispensed only to the members of the elite, while minorities and the poor are singled out for cruel and unusual sentences.

There is little doubt that in practice, this is the way our system works.

Still, it is considered to be in compliance with the 6th Amendment of the Constitution of the Republic of the United States of America.

A trial jury is composed of six members, whom are supposed to be peers, or more or less homogenous with the background of the person being tried (the defendant).

For crimes that are considered felonies, trial by jury is guaranteed in the US civilian courts.

Some societies such as Japan consider trial by jury to be much too risky for an innocent person, placing their fate in untrained lay people, rather than schooled judges.

And while it was once a voluntary part of the Japanese legal regiment, it was terminated in 1943.

In other societies, like the UK and the US, a jury trial is considered an objective arena, in which the peers of the accused can judge the defendant, in order to provide the fairest and most impartial process possible.

It is considered to be a constitutional right that defends one accused of a felony from possible capricious behavior, overzealous or corrupt actions on the part of judicial officials and prosecutors.

An Independent Power

The history of the US jury system goes back to the Magna Carta, although it has evolved since then.

It was not until the late 17th Century that the complete independence of a jury was legalized in England, the predecessor and template of the judicial process of the USA.

It was in the year 1670 that the jury was legally left free and without threat of punishment for deciding by conscience, even when that contradicted written statutes of the law.

Increasing Juror Activism

In recent years the history of the US jury system has entered into a new moment.

A growing percentage of Americans have become skeptical of the legal system and its ability to resolve in favor of justice, rather than in favor of moneyed interests.

It is within that framework, that a growing number of juries in the past two decades have come to utilize jury nullification.

A process that releases defendants that were in clear violation of the law, but had acted with a moral imperative.

Jurors Defend Justice

The history of the US jury system has shown a tendency toward maintaining the ignorance of jurors, regarding the full spectrum of the power of the jury as the last defense for citizens within the legal system.

Court rulings have gone as far as to gag defense attorneys from expanding on the rights and powers of the jury, to break from the instructions of judges, regarding how to arrive at a verdict.

The instructions are based solely on legal arguments, obviating decisions based on moral imperatives.

US citizens must come to understand the importance of educated and conscious participation as jurors, in order to protect the rights of fellow citizens from the possible excesses of power by judges and prosecutors.