The United States Constitution guarantees under the 6th Amendment the right to an impartial jury. This system is not without its flaws and leaves the door open for the biases of people to have an adverse impact on the outcome of trials. We will touch on the jury selection. How this Jury may have been unduly influenced. Did they collectively make the right decision? Briefly, we will suggest an alternative process to this time honored procedure.
Our United States Constitution guarantees under the 6th Amendment the right to an impartial jury. This system is not without its flaws and leaves the door open for the biases of people to have an adverse impact on the outcome of trials. We will touch on the jury selection. How this Jury may have been unduly influenced. Did they collectively make the right decision? Briefly, we will suggest an alternative process to this time honored procedure. In our united states there is the misconception about criminal proceedings. In particular the area where it concerns jurist being a cross section of society. The mistake is made in thinking that the makeup must be of a "jury of one's peers ". That is not the case. It was noted in a 1945 case, Thiel Vs. Southern Pacific Company, the supreme court clarified the concept of a " jury of one's peers " by noting that while it is not necessary for every jury to contain representatives of every conceivable racial, ethnic, religious, gender, and economic group in the community, court officials may not systematically and intentionally exclude any juror solely because his or her social characteristics (Schmalleger, 2012, p. 231).
