Beginning with the drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution, the
sixth amendment right, right to trial by peers or jury, has been enforced. Throughout
history, the jury process has been used in various cases, whether a high-profile case or a
state or local criminal case, juries have been the fundamental factors in considering
whether or not a defendant is to be freed or sent for punishment. As time has progressed,
however, the jury process has complicated, and juries have become more and more
susceptible to coercion and corruption in the courtrooms, thus causing glitches and
oftentimes costly errors in the United States' courts of law. From jury selection to juror
lack of knowledge or even motivation, corruption and confusion has been present and has
caused problems which can be avoidable and treated. Should the United States continue
to exercise their right to trial by peers, or should they reconsider the proven mishaps and
errors juries often make and eliminate the jury process altogether?
As proven in the United States Constitution, a trial by jury is a given and required
right to Americans encountering the law. As an amendment, Americans should then
maintain that right as they do with other amendments, and should not necessarily be
stripped from this right. As easily proven throughout various court cases, juries have
proven to be successful in punishing the guilty and freeing the innocent, and have
effectively exercised their right of trial by jury. In this regard, juries should thus be
allowed to continue in courtrooms and made even more readily available for those who
Although oftentimes proven accurate and successful, juries are faced with
corruption and mistakes just as often. Cases where jurors have proven innocent and
defendants have later plead guilty have occurred numerously,
...