The United States Constitution tells us that we are entitled to a “Jury of our Peers” when we have to go to trial. We have an obligation as citizens to preform jury duty when asked by our government. This can be a local civil action, criminal case or a Grand Jury Investigation. Citizens who are selected for Jury Duty are fulfilling an important civic duty to help the Criminal Justice system function as the founding fathers intended. The concept of being tried by a jury of our peers is to make sure that no one person has control over the fate of anyone.
On page 154 of your text is an article entitled “Ethical challenges in Criminal Justice: A writing assignment”. The Louise Woodward Case is a famous case that happened in the greater Boston area. If we are guarenteed a trial by jury what happens to our rights if a judge overrules the jury? How does this effect potential jurors in the future? Read the article and respond to the questions posed in the text. Additionally, review the information that is identified as being on the Web. Use this information to help you justify your position. Don’t forget the response is due by Friday December 5th. Test this Tuesday. See you then.
December 4, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Louise Woodward, a english ‘nanny’ who tended the Eappen children of Newton, MA was convicted of second degree murder in the shaking death of a 8 month old Matthew Eappen. Woodward admitted to ‘Gently Shaking’ the baby, and could not explain a fractured wrist also found on the baby. The prosecuting defence tarnished the character of Woodward by inquiring that she drank at night clubs [drinking age being 21 in the US and 18 in the UK]. The prosecutors emphisized the fact that she lied about age, as opposed to the underage drinker angle.
She was convicted guilty of murder in the second degree. Later, the sentence was asked to be dropped to manslaughter, despite a successful vote, the judge threw the option out the window.
So if we are said to be tried by jury – yet a judge can override the descision – is that a true reperesentation of the judicial system? Or has it been flawed? Personally, I feel that the judicial system seldom see’s cases like this, where matters of guilt or innocence are decided through the perspective of the individual attempting to decifer the facts at hand, meaning that the system is fine as is.
All my information was collected off http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/1997/au.pair/
Ill read the text in the book tomorrow and get more in depth with my position – but that’s where im at as of 7:08 p.m
December 4, 2008 at 9:02 pm
Mr. Flynn I am really confident with my blog response this week. I found this topic very interesting. Hope you like my research.
December 28, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Mr. Flynn is there going to be a question due over vacation??
January 3, 2009 at 6:57 pm
Check the blog Johannna-your all set
January 19, 2009 at 10:02 pm
I thought we were going to have a blog over the 3 day weekend??