The presence of the jury system in the US criminal justice system

  In the United States, those accused of crimes punishable by more than six months in prison have a constitutional right to a jury trial. Judges in some states are elected by registration. Prospective jurors are sent a form asking them to answer questions about a candidate's nationality, disability, English language proficiency, and whether they have any conditions or reasons for being a juror. If they are deemed eligible, a call will be issued.

In the United States, it is understood that juries usually consider evidence and testimony to determine questions of fact, while judges usually rule on questions of law. There has been much debate about the merits and demerits, and whether or not, of the jury system. juries are fact-finders, and the uniformity or disorder of justice they administer. As fact finders, jurors are expected to act as lie detectors.

Following British tradition, US juries usually consist of 12 judges, and jury decisions are expected to be unanimous. However, in many jurisdictions, the number of sittings is often reduced by statute to a small number (eg, five or six). Some jurisdictions also allow one, two, or three judges to enter a decision, even if there is a difference of opinion. During trials, lawyers object to the cross-examination of witnesses who are called to testify. Attorneys also make opening and closing statements to the jury, and at the end, the judge makes a final statement to the jury.

Under American law, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. A jury does not have to be completely convinced of a person's innocence. They should have a reasonable question. If they do not believe that the accused is guilty, they must find the suspect innocent. The jury meets in person to make a decision. Most states require all judges in criminal cases to approve the decision.

There have been criticisms of the American jury system. Some involve issues that divide American citizens in general. One such issue is race. A commonly used example is O.J. Simpson, actor and former football player. Simpson is a black citizen. He was charged with murdering his ex-wife and her male friend, a white man, in Los Angeles. In 1995, an African American jury found O. Simpson is not guilty of any crime. Later, an all-white jury ruled against him in a civil case against the victim's family. A jury ordered him to pay millions of dollars in damages. In public opinion, most white Americans believe that a black jury acquitted the guilty. Many black Americans believe that white juries convict innocent people.

In general, a trial in the US criminal justice system consists of several parties, including judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, defendants, victims, witnesses, and judges. The role of each party in court, in brief:

1) the judge who opened and explained the court proceedings;

2) the prosecutor explained to the jury that the act was intended to influence the defendant's guilt;

3) Counsel explains to the jury that the accused is innocent;

4) The process of proving that the accused was able to hear his testimony by presenting several witnesses. However, in the US criminal justice system, a defendant may not testify at trial;

5) The jury decides whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty on summary judgment. In a jury system, the jury is not allowed to ask questions of the accused, witness or victim. The jury is given the opportunity to decide whether the defendant is guilty or not. If the jury cannot decide whether the accused is guilty or not guilty, the jury shall convene to decide the question unanimously;

6) The judge decides the severity of the punishment for the accused;

The jury system has advantages over the criminal justice system introduced in Indonesia, where the system prioritizes society as a sovereign social element, and limits the power exercised by judges and prosecutors. A saying in the United States has been used for years: "It is better to acquit 10 guilty than to arrest 1 innocent." These two principles are the basis for the US adoption of the jury system.

The discussion arose out of the speaker program "Comparing the US and Indonesian Criminal Justice Systems," an American Corner Institute, a cooperative institute between the US Embassy and several major universities in Indonesia. This institution provides accurate and precise information on the development of political, economic, cultural, educational and social life in the United States, as well as books, magazines and journals, CD-ROM, DVD and Internet access. as well as online databases.

This activity was filled by US Speaker Stephen Kessler, a US Department of Justice officer who served as a legal advisor at the US Embassy in Jakarta. The reporter worked as a prosecutor in New York for 20 years.

During the event, the speaker also explained that kinship and other psychological factors can influence jurors, and there is no doubt that in some cases, jurors made mistakes in deciding whether the accused was guilty or not. As in O.J. Simpson above.

The participants in this activity also gave their answers as to why Indonesia does not use the jury system because, based on its legal system, although it is a union with the Common Law system, the Indonesian legal system is still nuanced in civil law. legal certainty is preferred, that is, what is written in the legal system. In contrast to the legal system in the United States, which prioritizes justice, the sense of justice that exists in society at a given time, the judge himself decides on the verdict of the jury, ie the prison term. On the other hand, the condition of the Indonesian population, which consists of different ethnic groups, will greatly influence the composition of the jury in the trial. On the other hand, although the United States uses the jury system with various benefits, it is actually believed that the United States has the highest crime rate.

In this case, it can be concluded that the jury system introduced in the United States has its own advantages over the legal system used in Indonesia, that is, the priority of community (civil society) sovereignty and self-restraint in the implementation of criminal laws. Acts to be enforced by the police. Prosecutor, or judge in a US trial. (Nevrina Hastuti)