it can paint a picture in their minds and influence their judgement. defendants are granted certain rights under the constitution. only the evidence specifically related to the crime should be heard not speculation.
around two percent of criminal trials in England and wales are heard by juries
Yes, civil cases can involve juries in the legal proceedings, but it depends on the specific circumstances of the case and the laws of the jurisdiction in which it is being heard.
In small claims court cases, juries are typically not involved. Instead, small claims are heard and decided by a judge. This is meant to simplify and expedite the legal process for the resolution of minor disputes.
If there is not evidence to support the charges then it is unlikely the prosecutor would pursue the matter until the time such evidence is obtained. Questionable cases are usually heard by a grand jury to determine whether or not there are sufficient grounds to prosecute the individual(s). Grand juries review all the facts of a case and hear witnesse testimony. One should be aware of the distinction between a lack of physical evidence and a lack of ANY evidence. Circumstantial evidence may still exist which might be sufficient for a prosecutor to pursue a conviction.
The judge's function in a trial by jury, is to rule on matters of law and evidence and ensure the trial is conducted properly in accordance with applicable law. But, it is the jury's verdict which IS the final decision. Depending upon the type of trial the judge MAY have some leeway in in sentencing or levying a punishment or fine.
If the witness is testifying that HE heard the gunshots - it is called "direct evidence.' It is also a type called "testimonial" evidence as opposed to "demonstative" evidence. The testimonial evidence is that the witness testifies verbally that he heard the gun. The gun itself if entered into evidence would be demonstrative evidence.
Jem cried because he was shocked and disappointed by the jury's decision to find Tom Robinson guilty despite the overwhelming evidence showing his innocence. He was also hurt by the racial prejudice and injustice prevalent in their society.
I've heard that he was but I'm pretty sure that he wasn't
Real
what a witness heard another person say about the crime
Although I have never heard of "proof of innocence" - if you have such hard "evidence" then this is a question that should be directed to your attorney.
To be tried by a group of "fellow citizens" refers to being tried before a jury of the defendant's "peers." This provision is not provided by the United States Constitution. The Sixth Amendment requires juries to be impartial. In addition, Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution requires defendants be tried by juries selected from the state in which the crime was committed.