Jury Duty
Jury system is a trial system that twelve
citizens decide whether defendants are
guilty or not. The verdict is
unanimous. The jurors are all laypersons , as far
as law is concerned. There
is a reason for unanimous verdict. If one jury is
against the verdict,it is
regarded as being room for doubt. Advantages of jury
system are direct
participation of American people, conventional judgement by
people, fair
stage of investigation, resistance against polictics' and judical
plot, and
making of democratic consciousness. For example, if a public
prosecutor
submit unlawful proof without trial permission, counsel makes an
objection to
it. A chief judge can't admit counsel's objection. Defendant is at
a
disadvantage. However, there is a possibility that jury system will
check
rotting of trial. Jurors need not explain reason of verdict to court.
If juries
feel way of investigation is dirty and viorate human rights, they
can decide the
defendant is innocnt. In short, jurors can decide defendant is
innocent even if
a public prosecutor has disadvantageous proofs for the
defendant. Juries who are
representative of citizen make the decision value
about proof. But, Jerome
Frank, one of delegates of legal realists,
criticized jury system in Law &
the Modern Mind, 1930. " A lot of
verdicts are irresponsible juries'
products of caprice and prejudice, for
example, the defendant is a rich
corporation, the plaintiff is a poor boy and
the counsel is an eloquent speaker.
Such facts often decide who wins or
loses." He characterizes that juries
have tendency to like weak people and
hate strong people. Jury system seems to
have many problems. A sophisticated
and rich person, a person of position and a
busy businessman do not want to
become a juror, because juries are bound for all
trial period and therefore
person who can afford time for trial can become a
juror, such as a housewife,
an old person and an unemployed person. As a result
jurors who have not even
seen stock averages are to make the decision for an
important and difficult
case involved in the Antimonoply Law. It is said that
citizen's ability to
execute for jury's duty is the problem. But I do not think
so. There are not
scientific grounds for their abilities.It is a prejudice.Law
degree and no
proper ability to serve as a juror are not closely connected.
Perhaps
high educational degree may become an obstacle of conventional
judgement.
It is said that Japanese companies always lose the lawsuit,
because American
juries have prejudice against Japanese. Do you think it is
true? The answer is
NO.The probability of winnig a suit, by a jury who
represents American citizen,
was fifty to one hundred in data from 1980 to
95. To my surprise, American
juries do not seem to matter nationality. After
all, hypothesis that American
juries have preconception against Japanese and
Japanese companies always lose
suit is not right. Moreover, hypothesis that
juries are emotional and sympathize
with defendant, and as a result the
opinion that big companies always loses suit
is groundless. The cause of
distrust in jury system is probably connected to the
way of news reports by
mass media. Mass media reports minus images. The general
public believe it is
the real image in spite of successful verdicts. The present
age is the one of
an information-intensive society. Many people are influenced
by the mass
media. If those people who have prejudice happen to see a juror who
gives a
big yawn or dozes during trial, minus image generalizes with
conviction.
Let me give you a concrete example. Under sensational
headline of newspapers,
mass media reports great costs of jury trials as if
every trial by a jury costs
a lot. I agree with the idea of jury system. It
is very good that American
people participate in judicature. But, many people
take a critical attitude
toward the jury system. I never think that they are
wrong. They may say "
We had better entrust trial to trained judge."
However, meaning of jury
system's existence is to stick to common sense of
citizens. Providing whether
the man is innocent or not by legal rights all
people can exercise is permitted
is more important than the fact whether the
man is innocent or not.