A jury trial is aimed at enhancing justice. The jury trial has basic steps that should be observed for an extensive and qualitative proceeding of a fair verdict. The steps include; reporting for duty by the jurors, selection of jurors, the trial process, deliberations, and verdict declaring after the deliberations (Wicourts, 2012). The constitution provides for a quick and fair trial process. This enriches the release of a verdict as soon as possible. This is meant to prevent delay of justice. The citizens are also constitutionally guaranteed a jury trial in a case that qualifies to be heard by the jurors. This is stipulated in the sixth amendment. The amendment safeguards citizens from unfair penalties (Galie & New York State, 2011). Initially, states like Rhode Island penalized their citizens without proceedings of a fair trial. The constitution also provides for defendants’ assistance of counsel. The defendant should be allowed an opportunity to confront the plaintiff’s witnesses. Finally, the defendant’s right to remain silent should also be considered.
Reporting for duty is the first stage. The stage encompasses a selection of jurors to be present during the case after the litigants declare their wish to have their case settled in the courtroom. Usually, jurors selected remain in the jury assembly or the courtroom. The juror qualifications are assessed to determine whether they are qualified to listen and give judgment in a case under question. The Clerk of Circuits chooses the jurors. The judge and attorneys, who provide information about the case, ask questions to determine the eligibility of the jurors to be selected. The questioning is called voir dire, meaning “to speak the truth” (Wicourts, 2012). The questions are meant to confirm that none of the jurors selected has any personal interest. For instance, questions such as knowledge of the parties in the case are asked, whether the juror knows about the case. They are also expected to provide reasons that may limit their ability to be fair and impartial in the case. The jurors are expected to respond to the questions with utmost faith and even take an oath to ensure they remain honest. The jurors selected are sworn to ensure fairness and impartiality in any decision made during and after the case. During the trial, the jurors sit in the jury box.
The third stage is the trial. It takes place in the courtroom. The jurors are provided with detailed information concerning the case. Jurors take notes as the hearing continues. The notes taken are not evidence. They should be disposed of once the trial is concluded. During the trial opening, statements are presented (Weiss, 2005). The presentation provides details of the case that the plaintiff and the defendant plan to offer. Usually, the plaintiff is the first to present. The statements provided are not evidence, but mere explanations. In the process of providing explanations, conflicting claims are likely to arise. These claims represent the concerns to be determined. Presentation of the evidence in court is guided by the case law, constitution, and court rule. The evidence may be categorized as either exhibit or testimony. In the process, the constitution allows for cross-examination of the different witnesses present. In presenting relevant evidence, the plaintiff has a priority in a civil case or the prosecutor in the case of a criminal offense. The priority permits them to give their statements first. The jury is called to ensure that only appropriate statements are made to the cases at hand. Expert testimony may be incorporated in the trial stage. According to Weiss (2005), the plaintiff and defendant are also allowed to provide closing statements.
The next stage is the jurors’ deliberations, which take place after the trial. The jurors get out of the courtroom to discuss the case in seclusion. The jury is provided with appropriate instructions to use in the deliberation room. In the deliberation room, a juror is selected to act as the moderator in the room. The moderator also provides his/her observation similar to other jurors. The position does not limit the moderator’s contribution. The jurors ordinarily listen to and provide opinions in utmost good faith. Applicable law provisions and facts are considered in the case to enhance the best verdict. Secondary sources of information are not considered in the proceeding. The jurors in the deliberation room are expected to produce a verdict in the case. About Wicourts (2012), the verdict remains the ultimate decision. The verdict in a criminal case is based on a unanimous agreement by the jurors while, in a civil case, the verdict is agreed on by five-sixth of the jury. The verdict is not reached at times in the deliberation room. If the verdict cannot be reached, this is regarded as a hung jury. In this case, the parties in the case will have to opt for another trial with another jury.
Lastly, after the case proceeds well without the hung jury, the jury is ending after the deliberation stage. The reading of the verdict in court marks the stage. In this case, the judge discharges the jury. The attorneys may be asked to comment on the proceedings of the case. This will enable the jury to enhance expertise. The judges and the jury may meet later after the jurors’ responsibility is complete. The meeting is expected to be an interactive forum where the jurors may ask questions and share their experiences. The litigants and jurors also provide an exit questionnaire at the end of a jury to assess satisfaction with the way the case was handled. The case is said to ensure fairness if the procedure discussed is followed to the letter, especially the selection of the jurors and the verdict.
References
Galie, P. J., & New York (State). (2011). The New York State Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Weiss, C. (2005). Step Into the Courtroom. Austin, TX: Prufrock Press Inc..
Wicourts. (2012). Outline of a jury trial. Web.