|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:35 pm Post subject: Pop Law Quiz for Kuros |
 |
|
| One of my students asked me today why there are 12 people on a jury and not 11 or 13 or some other number. I made a wild guess that it is related to a 'dozen' being some kind of traditional Anglo-Saxon thing. My student asked if it was related to the 12 Apostles. I told him I would ask you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
An interesting NY Times article from 1995
| Quote: |
| And in 1970, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution does not require that a jury be made up of 12 people; six would do just fine. For cases other than capital offenses, Arizona allows an eight-member jury and Florida allows six. In a 1978 Georgia case, however, the Supreme Court said a jury of five was cutting it too close. |
Perhaps Kuros can elaborate on the SC's decision since the article doesn't provide the SC's explanation for those decisions.
The article seems like both you and the student were on the right track though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leslie Cheswyck
Joined: 31 May 2003
Location: University of Western Chile
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steve Martin said it should be about "eleven, thirteen... somewhere around that number." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
johnriley007
Joined: 25 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 5:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Not sure why, but...
Right to jury trial only if defendant can get more than six months in jail.
Minimum required is six and they must be unanimous.
SC has approved 10-2 and 9-3. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I asked a professor about this, he said pretty much what johnriley did:
| Quote: |
Right to jury trial only if defendant can get more than six months in jail.
Minimum required is six and they must be unanimous.
SC has approved 10-2 and 9-3. |
Oregon and Louisiana are the only states that allow 10-2 and 9-3 in criminal cases. In civil cases, a lot of states allow 3/4ths majority (9-3).
Remember that selective incorporation of the US Constitution to the states does not include the 7th Amendment, so the States can reform their Constitutions to abolish trial by jury.
-----------
"When Magna Charta declared that no freeman should be deprived of life, etc.,'but by the judgment of his peers or by the law of th land,' it referred to a trial by 12 jurors." Thompson v. Utah, 170 U.S. 343, 349 (1898). Here, the petitioner was first tried in Utah territory by 12, found guilty, but new trial was granted and removed to another county; second trial was tried in the State of Utah, and petitioner was found guilty by a jury of eight, judgment affirmed by Utah's Supreme Court. But US S. Ct. ruled that the jury of eight was ex post facto and that US Constitution applied to Utah territory, and reversed and remanded for unanimous verdict by 12 jurors.
So I looked for a copy of the Magna Charta. Clause 39 simply says, " No free man shall be taken, imprisoned . . . except by lawful judgment of his peers and by the law of the land." No number of his peers is mentioned.
Eventually, after some flailing about on the internet, I found this:
"The Islamic Lafif was a body of twelve members drawn from the neighbourhood and sworn to tell the truth, who were bound to give a unanimous verdict, about matters "which they had personally seen or heard, binding on the judge, to settle the truth concerning facts in a case, between ordinary people, and obtained as of right by the plaintiff." The only characteristic of the English jury which the Islamic Lafif lacked was the "judicial writ directing the jury to be summoned and directing the bailiff to hear its recognition." According to Professor John Makdisi, "no other institution in any legal institution studied to date shares all of these characteristics with the English jury." It is thus likely that the concept of the Lafif may have been introduced to England by the Normans, who conquered both England and the Emirate of Sicily, and then evolved into the modern English jury."
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiqh)
-----------
I don't know. Here is where I give up for the day and return to Decedent's Estates homework. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 12:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for your efforts, guys. I'll pass on the Islamic Lafif info even though it just puts the question back another step. My student will find that interesting.
You might be interested in knowing who asked the question. A couple of times a week I have a private lesson with a former minister of defense/chairman of the JCS. He's a retired 4-star general, about 70 years old. (He entered the army in 1961, just after Park took over.) He's one of the most interesting people I've ever met. He has his own web site where he posts photographs he's taken--one of his hobbies, along with the poetry he writes. Last week he asked if I knew anything about Queen Noor of Jordan. He wanted to know if she was American because he said she sounded American when he met her but didn't think it was polite to ask her at the formal reception. He's met everybody and likes to express his impression of them. Rummy, Cheyney and Bush do not come off well  but he thinks Obama has done very well in his appointments. He speaks great English, almost at native speaker level, except for his speed and a bit of a problem with listening.
The purpose of the 'lessons' seems to be to help him kill time while he waits for someone to call and ask his opinion on current military and/or political issues. I'm not expected to actually teach him anything. My job is to ask follow-up questions to keep him talking and introduce a new word from time to time.
Anyway, he's a delightful elderly gentleman with the most inquisitive mind. Someday, when I grow up, I want to be like him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 14, 2009 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| When court procedure was still based on the writ system, certain civil complaints could be rebutted by bringing in 11 witnesses who would swear the defendant was blameless. I guess 12 was just always considered a nice number. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
