Are Twelve Heads Better Than One?

The Ellsworth article discusses the process through which juries deliberate trials. It begins with comparing judges to juries. While juries are typically a dozen people of varied backgrounds and experiences, a judge is usually better educated, especially in law, and has experience in the legal system. Nonetheless, citizens are made jurors and given the right to make these decisions because it is believed that they harbor the interests of the community. Also, it is believed that, through the deliberation process, a refined version of “the truth” will emerge and that the jurors will converge upon the verdict that will impart the most justice. To that end, the article discusses the gravity with which the task was taken but also shows a lack of knowledge of – and guidance within – the legal system, including definitions of the charges against defendants. This article does not articulate that jurors are incapable of granting just verdicts; rather, they do not have the “educational criteria” to make completely informed decisions (Ellsworth 224).

The article actually warmed me a bit. Because many past articles imparted the belief that many American citizens hold little weight or faith in the legal system, I thought that juries might not accept the gravity of making these decisions. Evidently, I was wrong. Despite not having specially knowledge or experience, it is clear that juries wish to truly see justice done and care about the aspects of the case – especially motive, an ever-important factor. Perhaps in believing that the system is flawed or broken, jurors act to take it upon themselves to see justice done to their fellow citizens.