1) Comparative Perspective (POST) write a 8-10 sentence detailed paragraph.
Describe at least two ways that the US jury system different from the system in France.
Which system do you think works best? Why?
2) write a response to the students paragraph 5 sentences min. Write how you agree with their ideas and add more to it. Do not just compliment the student on their work. Add details of how you agree.
Student response: According to French Entree “Understanding the French Legal System: Civil vs. Common Law” by Silvia Edwards Davis affirms The differences between both countries. With our US Legal System of common law, it is the basis of the legal structure of many English speaking countries from England to Australia. The French Legal system, however, is based on civil law meaning that it is codified and it originates from the Roman law. Also, One other major difference between US and France would be your innocence. In the US you are Innocent until proven guilty. In France, you are guilty until proven innocent. I think this is very important to state and is apart of what I do not agree with. I believe the US system works best because If someone was put away immediately without giving them time with their families to discuss what would happen and automatically being accused, then the whole world and their families most importantly are going too believe they actually committed the crime. Being innocent until proven guilty is fair. You are treated equally and the moment you are found guilty you will be treated as an inmate like you deserve. I was completely unaware of the differences between France and the US because this was the first time I actually had to research into this topic!
3) Jury Service (POST) write a 8-10 sentence detailed paragraph.
Watch the video for this week about Jury Service before you answer these questions.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=49QVXbYsJ54
What did you learn from this video?
If you were called for federal jury service, and you watched this video as a potential juror, would it help you understand your responsibilities and duties?
Tell us what you thought of the voir dire process (asking the jurors questions to find an objective jury). Was it effective?
Why do you think the judge asked a prospective juror whether the prior juries she served on were able to decide on a verdict (as opposed to being hung or deadlocked)?
What Constitutional Amendment guarantees a defendant a right to a jury of his/peers?
4) write a response to the students paragraph 5 sentences min. Write how you agree with their ideas and add more to it. Do not just compliemnt the student on their work. Add details of how you agree.
Student Response: I learned that jurors are the most important part of the U.S. jury system. I learned that only white males could serve as jurors in the 1970. Jurors in the U.S. come from diverse backgrounds. In addition, the judge gets to ask jurors, if they are available or if there is a reason they cannot serve as a juror. The next step the attorneys get to ask the jurors questions that would prevent a juror from deciding a verdict. I have never served as a juror, so watching this video made me understand the seriousness of being a juror. I thought the responsibilities and duties were understandable. I learned to not stay quiet. In other words, if I have work or have a vacation coming up to let the judge know. What really caught my attention was when the judge told the jurors to not talk to family about the case. People are almost always using social media and talking to friends or family. In my opinion, it would be difficult to serve as a juror because I constantly use my phone and talk to friends or family. In order to serve as a juror people would have to be focused and dedicated to deciding a verdict. I believe the voir dire process was effective because attorneys ask jurors if their experiences will prevent them from giving a unfair verdict, such as, if the juror served for a past case. A hung or deadlocked jury is a jury that could not make a verdict. The judge ask the juror if the jurors in the prior case were able to decide a verdict because the judge wanted to know if jury system is effective. The judge also wanted to know if the prior case would prevent the juror from deciding a verdict. The sixth amendment guarantees a defendant a right to a jury and a right to an attorney.
0 comments