1. “Criminal juries should be abolished as an experienced judge can easily fulfil the role of a jury as they aremore equipped in deciding an appropriate verdict.” Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree withthis statement, justifying your opinion with reasons.
Some arguments for criminal juries should be abolished:
- an experienced judge can easily fulfil the role of a jury as they are more equipped in deciding an appropriate verdict.
- Judges are knowledgeable in areas of law
- Judges have experience and legal expertise in dealing with cases
- Judges are impartial and unbiased
Some arguments against criminal juries being abolished:
- a criminal jury acts as a trial by one’s peers.
- questions of fact are decided by a randomly selected group of people that represents the views and values of the community.
- A criminal jury listens to the facts of a case and evidence presented in court, determines questions of fact, applies the law as stated by the judge, and decides a verdict of guilty or not guilty beyond reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof in criminal cases.
- The decision-making is shared among the twelve jurors whose role is to be impartial and unbiased when deciding the outcome of the criminal case before them in the court.
- Criminal juries do not have to give reasons for their decisions.