Want this question answered?
The jury don't look at the defendant (Tom Robinson).
Jem realizes the jury has convicted Tom Robinson before the verdict is read based on the jury's expressions and body language. He notices that the jury members look uneasy and avoid making eye contact with Tom or his lawyer, suggesting they have already made up their minds about the verdict.
The jury may not look at the defendant they have convicted as a sign of respect for the seriousness of the decision they have made. It can also help maintain the emotional distance necessary for them to make an impartial decision based on the evidence presented during the trial.
Yes. You can look at their holiday schedule on the website.
Scout observes that the jury members are unperturbed and do not look at Tom Robinson or his family as they deliver the guilty verdict. She notices their indifference and lack of emotion, which contrasts with the gravity of the situation.
If a lot of people focus on one thing they can accomplish great thingsThey are similar because for both, Scout and Jem are waiting and do not know what will happen.She looks back remembering her dad (Atticus) shooting the sick dog.
To avert one's eyes in such a manner is usually an admission of guilt: You've done something you are not proud of because you know it was not the right thing to do, but you did it anyway. That's psychological, not just literary. To apply that more to the situation being referenced, the jury likely produced an answer they knew was wrong, so wrong that they could not even face the defendant they were condemning. How ironic: the jury was more guilty than the defendant.
Scout knows that the jury never looks at a defendent they have not aquitted. and when the jury walked in, none of them looked at Tom
Scout observes that the jury returns with their verdict very quickly, indicating that they have reached a decision swiftly. She also notices that they avoid looking at Tom Robinson or his family, suggesting discomfort or guilt. Additionally, Scout senses a sense of tension and seriousness in the courtroom as the verdict is read.
Yes, in a civil trial or in overturning a finding of guilty in a criminal case. A judge cannot overrule a jury's finding that the defendant is not guilty."Judgment notwithstanding the verdict" (JNOV) is used when no reasonable jury presented with the evidence at bar could come up with the verdict it came up with.Of course, the party that "won" the decision of the jury may appeal the JNOV.Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29 states(a) Before Submission to the Jury. After the government closes its evidence or after the close of all the evidence, the court on the defendant's motion must enter a judgment of acquittal of any offense for which the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction. The court may on its own consider whether the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction. If the court denies a motion for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the government's evidence, the defendant may offer evidence without having reserved the right to do so.(b) Reserving Decision. The court may reserve decision on the motion, proceed with the trial (where the motion is made before the close of all the evidence), submit the case to the jury, and decide the motion either before the jury returns a verdict or after it returns a verdict of guilty or is discharged without having returned a verdict. If the court reserves decision, it must decide the motion on the basis of the evidence at the time the ruling was reserved.(c) After Jury Verdict or Discharge.(1) Time for a Motion. A defendant may move for a judgment of acquittal, or renew such a motion, within 14 days after a guilty verdict or after the court discharges the jury, whichever is later.(2) Ruling on the Motion. If the jury has returned a guilty verdict, the court may set aside the verdict and enter an acquittal. If the jury has failed to return a verdict, the court may enter a judgment of acquittal.The reason the FRCP do not permit a court to set aside a jury verdict of acquittal and enter a jugment of guilty is to preserve the Sixth Amendment guarantee that all criminal defendants shall enjoy the right to a trial by jury as well as to preserve the Fifth Amendment prohibition against double jeopardy.The reason the FRCP permit a trial court to set aside a jury verdict of guilty and enter one of not guilty, is to preserve the defendant's right not to be convicted of a crime except on evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. In the interests of justice, no trial court should let stand a verdict of guilty where the evidence does not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.These rights apply to state courts as well as to Federal courts because they have been incorporated into the 14th Amendment because they are a fundamental part of our jurisprudence.Note that these are the Federal court rules; however most state court rules are modeled after the Federal Rules and all will have some variation of the authority to set aside a guilty verdict.
because after their decision they are not allowed to look at tom. because when a jury find someone guilty, they mustn´t look the culprit in his eyes
The judge had a sullen look as he read the verdict.