0
i have an opinion answer for each side...
should be majority
Juries should not have to reach a unanimous vote to reach their decision. Having a compulsory unanimous vote can cause many problems. People will always have different opinions as everyone has a different personality, and so will not always agree. People also have all different views these can be caused by their upbringing, religion, lifestyle, career, in fact any aspect of their lives. This means that they simply will not believe the same things as others and not always the correct verdict of a case. However, if there is a majority vote given from a jury it will mean that the verdict is the most correct decision that can be made. Another reason for a majority vote is that evidence given in a case is never totally clear; people can lie and evidence can be tampered with or simply unclear in itself. And so in some cases people can simply never be truly positive for a verdict. But when people come together they can decide by opinion, again, the most correct answer. And so majority may be as close as you can get in many cases, if unanimous votes are compulsory and people just keep trying to gain a positive decision for the outcome it will often just cause more trauma for the people involved, cost more money from the government and country and keep criminals out of jail living the lives they no longer deserve for years more than necessary.
Should be unanimous
It is important for juries to have a unanimous vote because it forces each member to really focus on the case and they have to know what they re talking about because the outcome of the case truly depends on each decision of each individual. So if the outcome of the case is an unclear decision to the jury the case will be forced to continue until it is clear. This keeps things so that a person is very fairly tried and the jury will not be fairly sure but absolutely positive and so have the fair right to claim that an individual is guilty or not. When deciding on something that will possibly effect or ruin a person's entire life it cannot be a vague decision. If there are one or two people in the jury disagreeing with the verdict this only proves that there are some aspects of the case saying that the opinions of the other jury members are not necessarily correct, and therefore the rest of the case should definitely be reconsidered. This may cost the country more money but it is surely a small price to pay when taking away the life of an innocent person or discovering that someone is really guilty.
hope it helped(:
What else can I help you with?
What do you think about the requirement for jury verdicts to be unanimous - do you think jury verdicts should be unanimous Why or why not?
The requirement for jury verdicts to be unanimous is a fundamental aspect of the justice system. Some argue that unanimity ensures fair and just decisions, as it reflects the collective agreement of all jurors. Others believe that allowing for non-unanimous verdicts could lead to quicker resolutions and prevent hung juries. Ultimately, the decision on whether jury verdicts should be unanimous or not depends on the balance between ensuring justice and efficiency in the legal process.
Why do you think verdicts should be unanimous?
Becuase, if I am correct, it must take all of the jury to convict someone of murder; unanimous means all.
What is the vote needed to reach a decision by jury in US district courts?
In a criminal trial, all 12 jurors must be in agreement. Some state jurisdiction allow 10-2 or 9-3 verdicts. Federal courts always require unanimity.
What majority verdict is and how it is different to a normal jury verdict?
In some (not all) states provisions are made for conducting trials for certain lesser offenses (misdemeanor offenses - civil cases - traffic cases - etc) with either fewer than 12 jurors, or for verdicts that are less than unanimous. In some states minor offenses can be tried with as few as seven jurors, and the verdicts do not necessarily have to be unanimous (e.g.: 5 out of 7 vote guilty, or 8 our of 12 vote guilty). It is a way to shorten the trial process and reduce the strain on the jury pool. However - in capital cases and/or for serious offenses (felonies) the jury will usually always consist of 12 jurors and the verdict must be unanimous.
Do all jurors have to agree in order to find someone not guilty?
No. Indeed in Scottish law there is provision for a 3rd outcome: Not Proven. It was once the case that juries had to be unanimous, but now they have majority verdicts. Sometimes a majority decision cannot be reached.
What vote is required for a conviction?
In a criminal trial, a conviction typically requires a unanimous vote from the jury in most jurisdictions. This means that all jurors must agree on the verdict of guilty for a conviction to be achieved. However, some jurisdictions may allow for non-unanimous verdicts in certain cases, particularly in misdemeanor trials. In civil cases, a majority vote is usually sufficient for a decision.
What type of verdict are Texas juries required to reach in criminal cases?
Texas juries are required to reach a unanimous verdict in criminal cases, meaning that all members of the jury must agree on the defendant's guilt or innocence. If the jury is unable to reach a unanimous verdict, it results in a hung jury and the case may be retried.
Jury verdicts should be unanimous?
i have an opinion answer for each side...should be majorityJuries should not have to reach a unanimous vote to reach their decision. Having a compulsory unanimous vote can cause many problems. People will always have different opinions as everyone has a different personality, and so will not always agree. People also have all different views these can be caused by their upbringing, religion, lifestyle, career, in fact any aspect of their lives. This means that they simply will not believe the same things as others and not always the correct verdict of a case. However, if there is a majority vote given from a jury it will mean that the verdict is the most correct decision that can be made. Another reason for a majority vote is that evidence given in a case is never totally clear; people can lie and evidence can be tampered with or simply unclear in itself. And so in some cases people can simply never be truly positive for a verdict. But when people come together they can decide by opinion, again, the most correct answer. And so majority may be as close as you can get in many cases, if unanimous votes are compulsory and people just keep trying to gain a positive decision for the outcome it will often just cause more trauma for the people involved, cost more money from the government and country and keep criminals out of jail living the lives they no longer deserve for years more than necessary.Should be unanimousIt is important for juries to have a unanimous vote because it forces each member to really focus on the case and they have to know what they re talking about because the outcome of the case truly depends on each decision of each individual. So if the outcome of the case is an unclear decision to the jury the case will be forced to continue until it is clear. This keeps things so that a person is very fairly tried and the jury will not be fairly sure but absolutely positive and so have the fair right to claim that an individual is guilty or not. When deciding on something that will possibly effect or ruin a person's entire life it cannot be a vague decision. If there are one or two people in the jury disagreeing with the verdict this only proves that there are some aspects of the case saying that the opinions of the other jury members are not necessarily correct, and therefore the rest of the case should definitely be reconsidered. This may cost the country more money but it is surely a small price to pay when taking away the life of an innocent person or discovering that someone is really guilty.hope it helped(:
What are the different verdicts that a jury can decide?
The jury can give two verdicts, guilty, or not guilty in a criminal trial. They are typically given a set of charges that they have to give a verdict on. Some allow them to convict on a lessor included charge. Meaning if someone is charged with first degree murder, they could convict of second degree murder. If the jury cannot decide on a verdict, it can be ruled a hung jury. At that point the trial can start all over again with a new jury. In a civil trial, the jury determine if they are liable or not liable.
The vote needed to reach a decision by the jury in a US district court criminal trial?
The vote of a jury must be unanimous in all criminal actions in the US District Court.
Do decisions in a grand jury have to be unanimous?
In the United States, decisions in a grand jury do not have to be unanimous. Typically, a simple majority is sufficient for a grand jury to indict someone, although the specific requirements can vary by jurisdiction. This means that a grand jury can reach a decision to charge an individual even if not all jurors agree. Grand juries usually consist of 16 to 23 members, depending on the state or federal system.
What proportion of a jury must vote to convict for a person to be found guilty of a crime in a jury trial?
Unanimous. Sidenote: In many states, in 'lesser' cases, not all juries consist of 12 jurors
