NCJ Number
86318
Date Published
1981
Length
4 pages
Annotation
This first-person account of being summoned, selected, and serving as a juror presents perspectives of the values and weaknesses of the jury system.
Abstract
Every effort was made to either avoid or defer answering the summons to be considered for jury duty because of the time involved, time deemed to be a waste because of the considered improbability of being selected as a juror. It took 2 1/2 days to complete the jury; those eliminated by the prosecution and defense were both the 'hanging jurors' and the 'bleeding hearts.' The likelihood of reaching a unanimous verdict in the case, which was entirely circumstantial, seemed extremely remote, particularly since the jurors in their informal conversations during the trial appeared to disagree on most topics that entered the conversation. The jury deliberations, however, showed that the jurors could direct their attention to the evidence presented in the case and conscientiously base their reasoning only upon that evidence. Once 11 persons had become convinced on a particular point, they set out to convince the lone dissenter of the reasonableness of the majority position. The dissenter relented before the jury was sequestered for a second night. There was a sense that the deliberation process and the achievement of a unanimous verdict had yielded an unbiased and reliable decision, although the judge could probably have reached the same decision in less than 30 minutes and at significantly less cost. There is something comforting in the knowledge that citizens charged with serious crimes can only be found guilty after 12 of their peers have unanimously decided that the evidence is sufficient to remove any reasonable doubt about their guilt. Although the jury system has many weaknesses, there appears to be no better way for accomplishing what it intends: the protection of the liberty of the innocent while protecting society from the criminal.