Law Assignment: Analyzing Legal Concepts and Jury Trials in Detail

This law assignment delves into the concept of 'margin of error' within the legal context, examining how judges may make mistakes due to ambiguous evidence or complexities in law. It references '12 Angry Men' to illustrate the fallibility of jury decisions, highlighting instances where jurors may be swayed by witness testimonies without considering all relevant facts. The assignment also discusses the role of juror 8 in questioning the evidence, particularly the knife, and the challenges in hearing and interpreting events. It then outlines the qualifications for jurors, the definition of a hung jury, and the importance of selecting impartial jurors, while acknowledging the influence of media in obstructing the selection of impartial jurors. This document is a valuable resource for students studying law, providing insights into the intricacies of jury trials and legal decision-making.

RUNNING HEAD: LAW ASSIGNMENT
LAW ASSIGNMENT

LAW ASSIGNMENT 1
Table of Contents
Q 1...................................................................................................................................................2
Q 2...................................................................................................................................................2
Q 3...................................................................................................................................................3
Q 4...................................................................................................................................................3
Q 5...................................................................................................................................................4
Q 6...................................................................................................................................................4
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................5

LAW ASSIGNMENT 2
Q 1
The common meaning of ‘margin of error’ refers to the amount which is acceptable in
case inaccuracy or mistake or any change in conditions. In the context of law, the ‘margin of
error’ means the fact that panel of judges sometimes makes faults at the time of taking decisions
whether the suspect is guilty or not. There are many faults which validates errors. This includes
inadequate or ambiguous proof or there might be a failure of evidences or complexities in law
(De Vos, 2017).
Q 2
It may be termed as the accuracy rate in the decisions made by the panel of judges. As
per the above discussion, panel of judges made many mistakes at the time of decision making
because of inadequate or ambiguous proofs that causes inaccurate decisions. ‘12 angry men’ is
the good reference in which panel of judges believed in the witnesses given by the old man and
the woman who lives nearby to the suspect’s place (De, Vos, 2017).
Many panel of judges believes in the witnesses that were given without paying
consideration to the other relevant facts of the case. Any person who is in the trial for the first
time must know that judges are those who make decisions on their best judgements and after
consideration of all the relevant facts of the case without being partial and prejudice towards
suspect. Further even if they make faults then it must be due to misleading facts or incomplete
information that were presented with respect to the case.

LAW ASSIGNMENT 3
Q 3
The most relevant point that had caused the judges some amount of hesitation regarding
the guilt of the suspect is when Juror 8 have been presented before the judge, the knife was
exactly the same with which the blamed has been supposed to have murdered his father (Rose,
2016).
Juror 8 said that he bought the knife from the junk shop near the boy’s place (Rose,
2016). He just wanted to convince that purchased knife was lost and that knife was found by the
another person and murdered his father, thereby putting the blame on the accused. Juror 8 was
initially disagreed with the 11 jurors and opinioned that suspected is not guilty.
The other most important point which was addressed by the juror 8 was that old man is
not capable to hear from the boy ‘I will kill you’ when the train was passing. The reason is that
10 seconds are required for el to pass and the old man was required to take 6 seconds or more to
go near the window. Before the old man can hear the boy by shouting ‘I will kill you’ and the
body to fall down, the el was passing through his window and it is difficult to hear what one is
thinking (Gale, 2015).
Q 4
Any individual who is tangibly weak or mentally retarded to carry out the juror duties or
has been witnessed to death or imprisonment for life was awarded. The person is subject to bond
for exhibiting good behavior. Further the panel of judges must be unbiased or impartial or must
be competent to understand the legitimate proceedings and other relevant facts with respect to
the case.

LAW ASSIGNMENT 4
Q 5
A judicial injury that comes without an agreement upon a decision even after an extended
discussion is called as hung jury (Zucker, 2017). A hung jury fails to reach at the supermajority
which is required to agree on a decision. All the judges must agree totally that the suspect is
guilty and the court has proved suspect a guilty person without any suspicion. Further there is a
hung jury, and all the jurors do not agree solidly on a decision then the case shall be tried before
on a new jury.
Q 6
Selection of panel of judges are also equally important part of a trial procedure while
making decisions (De Vos, 2017). Now in the modern period, the lawyers wish to have jurors
who are acted in the client’s favor. Another important factor that obstructs the selection of
impartial juror is a media. Mostly jury members are not aware of the case for which they have
been selected to determine. But media barely make it possible to find jurors who are not aware of
the cases particularly in the high profile cases.

LAW ASSIGNMENT 5
REFERENCES
De Vos, W. L. (2017). The Jury Trial in Western Australia: Comparative Observations. Int'l
Trade & Bus. L. Rev., 20, 287.
Rose, R. (2016). Twelve angry men. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Gale, C. L. (2015). A Study Guide for Rose Reginald's Twelve Angry Men. Gale, Cengage
Learning.
Zucker, K. J. (2017). Hung Jury. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1-4.