Talk:Jury trial

message: So is this the same as a trial by jury or not? If not, make trial by jury not a redirect here. Evercat 02:08, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair question. This is simply an issue of semantics; most state constitutions use the language interchangably. Folajimi 16:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trial by jury / Jury trial

message: This is a type of trial as opposed to a bench trial and should be it's own article I think. The topics should avoid overlap as much as possible, but I think they are distinct topics. I didn't want to remove the merge notice if someone felt strongly about it though. - Taxman 18:56, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
:Absolutely agree, this is a very distinct topic.  I'm going to remove the merge notice. - Jersyko talk 01:56, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
I've put up a new suggestion to merge, not with Trial, but with Jury.  There's really A LOT of overlap with that page.  72.70.228.165 13:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Disagree with merge notice

message: Does not discuss the origin of trial by jury, introduced by Athenian lawgiver Solon. Nor does the article discuss the historical trial by jury in Greece, or B.C. in general.
:Does anyone know enough about this to write a reasonable section?? I doubt it. Jake95(talk!) 19:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Solon

message: [moved my question from Talk:Jury, although I see it's similar to the post above]
The article mentions only the Magna Carta as the beginning of Jury Trials.
While this may be the origin of the concept of modern trials, should there be no mention of the Athenian trial by peers, which could include juries of several hundred free men, such as the Trial of Socrates? — Asbestos | Talk  (RFC) 09:01, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Juries

message: Jury instructions doesn't seem to be going anywhere. I don't think it deserves an article all its own. What do you think? Mrees1997 20:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be merged or dropped in a French legal system article. Calwatch 07:29, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jury instructions stub seems to need merging

message: The 7th amendment does not generally apply to the states....eg there is no Constitutional right to a jury trial in state civil cases, except where enforcing a fed right...  I added this to the text.  I hope this clarifies for those who are unclear about the state v. fed Constitution....  and the rights accorded to citizens as incorporated into the 14th Amendment due process clause (thus applying to the states).  The 7th Amendment right to a jury trial in civil cases is one of those few exceptions that did not become part of the bill of rights.  THat is why many states have added a right to a jury trial in civil cases to their state constitutions. jgwlaw 04:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Important Clarification

message: I probably should have mentioned this at the time, but I was fairly new, and didn't think of it: I've changed the redirect of Trial by jury to direct to the near-identical Trial by Jury - the Gilbert and Sullivan opera, under the principle that a change in capitalisation shouldn't send you to wildly differing places, with, of course, a disambiguator at the top of the opera. Is it agreed that this is correct? Adam Cuerden talk 07:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trial by Jury

message: In Poland there's a jury system like in France. For example in murder case there are 2 professional judges and 3 jurrors. In America it is stupid. I hate it how they do it. Poland Is so much better than every other country.
# Do you have any sources of this information? Do you live in Poland?
Jake95(talk!) 19:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Poland

message: I have put in a brief introductory para as the article previously launched into things without explaining what a jury trial was.  Fat Red 05:12, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro para

message: The first sentence launches right in without even mentioning the context.   One has to assume there is a missing introduction along the lines of "In Roman times..."?   I'm not remotely qualified to write this, but hopefully someone will?  Maxplanar (talk) 06:18, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Jury Trials

message: The case Blanton v. North Las Vegas had its own subheading under the United States heading.  I deleted it since: 1) there is no reference to the relevance of this case, and 2) it is far too specific, discussing a minor common law rule for the right to a jury in a criminal trial, that need not be mentioned in a general article about jury trials. If someone thinks this case should stay in, I guess there just needs to be more clarification over it's importance. CougRoyalty (talk) 04:43, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Blanton v. North Las Vegas

message: There was a section-stub marker on the Canada section; I've removed it and put in a summary of the linked-to article. Can a Canadian please give it a san-check? Thanks! Rosuav (talk) 05:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Canada

message: # In which jurisdictions is a jury member allowed to abstain from voting?
#* In Scottish law: yes Response to Consultation on “The Modern Scottish Jury in Criminal Trials”, pg. 4
#* In the North Carolina district court: no 213 F.3d 171 (4th Cir. 2000), §4
#*any more info?
# Where abstention is allowed, how does this affect the calculation of any required majority or unanimous votes? 
#*any info?
jnestorius(talk) 04:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Jury members abstaining

message: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2009/1039.html
"26. On the other hand, as the Commissioner's interim report pointed out, jury trial is not seen as essential in other parts of the world, nor under Article 6 of the Human Rights Convention. Mr Crow also fairly makes the points that the great majority of criminal offences are tried without a jury, and that it is hard to point to a principled basis for drawing a clear line. (For those interested, the Wikipedia entry on jury trial has a surprisingly full, comparative treatment of the issue. The "positive belief" about jury trial in the US, is contrasted with sentiment in other countries in which it is considered "bizarre and risky" for issues of liberty to be entrusted to untrained laymen.)" 20th May 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.131.2.146 (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: This page complimented in a decision by the Uk High Court

message: There's really a ton of overlap between jury trial and jury. Jury is really about the juries used in jury trials (it doesn't really cover grand juries), and I think they should be merged. II | (t - c) 16:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, possibly, but if so the merge should go the other direction from what is currently suggested in the templates.  To be explicit, merge  jury trial into jury, not jury into jury trial. --Trovatore (talk) 21:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be willing to go that way too, although I don't see why it's a big deal either way. II | (t - c) 22:15, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's just kind of incongruous to have an article about the specific term when there's no article about the general one. --Trovatore (talk) 22:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with jury

message: there are soo many countries which have jury system.we need a simple diagrammatic representation.can anyone create a map.
59.95.129.168 (talk) 12:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: need to have a map

message: "Although it says and or by the law of the land, this in no manner can be interpreted as if it were enough to have a positive law, made by the king, to be able to proceed legally against a citizen."  This is a rather perfunctory and unsupported statement - as is the whole section.
Blackstone describes the four contemporary methods of criminal process in 1215:  presentment, indictment, information, and appeal.  4 Black c. 23.  Information was itself divided into two parts:  those initiated by the King in emergency (threats to the crown); and those initiated by master of the crown-office.  The latter are "any grofs and notorious mifdemefsnors, riots, batteries, libels, and other immoralities of an atrocious kind . . . which, on account of their magnitude or pernicious example, deferve the moft public animadverfion."  Id. at 309.  Information were actions initiated by the crown or on behalf of the crown and were widely accepted process for initiating criminal procedures both before and after the Magna Carta.
Indeed, authors have interpreted this section differently than the wikipedia article.  See, e. g., McKenchnie, William Sharp (Ed.), Magnat Carta:  A Commentary on the Great Charter of King John, with an Historical Introduction (Glasgow: Maclehose, 1914).  There is a vast difference between grand juries, trials by a jury of the peers, (contemporary) common law, and due process.  A difference that this section alternately glosses over and mashes together.
Similarly, the passage on self-informing is a gross overstatement that conflates "presentment" with "indictment" and ignores the role of the officers after a presentment.
Moreover, I'm pretty sure this section is lifted without proper attribution.
Cannoneerc
Cannoneerc (talk) 13:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blackstone disagrees: 

message: The case of Vicky Pryce on trial for accepting her husband's sppeding ticket produced a series of extraordinary  questions from the Jury including one asking if the jury can base their decision based on evidence not presnted in Court.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9882943/Vicky-Pryce-jurors-given-further-directions-by-judge-in-speeding-points-case.html (Coachtripfan (talk) 09:54, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vicky Pryce Trial - Jury's 10 questions undemines system 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Jury trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080929155059/http://www.letemps.ch:80/template/tempsFort.asp?page=3&article=240621 to http://www.letemps.ch/template/tempsFort.asp?page=3&article=240621
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:11, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Jury trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081208054505/http://www.mth.kcl.ac.uk/~streater/cotdeaths.html to http://www.mth.kcl.ac.uk/~streater/cotdeaths.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150615052822/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?art_id=78017&con_type=1 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?art_id=78017&con_type=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061202230002/http://homepage.smc.edu/sindell_steven/AJ3%20Folder/Currentevents/aj3.jury.nullific.html to http://homepage.smc.edu/sindell_steven/AJ3%20Folder/Currentevents/aj3.jury.nullific.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919043231/http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/amdt7.html to http://www.gpoaccess.gov/constitution/html/amdt7.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Jury trial. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131227022844/http://www.hogstadomstolen.se/Domstolar/hogstadomstolen/Avgoranden/2012/2012-12-20%20O%20624-11%20Beslut.pdf to http://www.hogstadomstolen.se/Domstolar/hogstadomstolen/Avgoranden/2012/2012-12-20%20O%20624-11%20Beslut.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101209143055/http://www.bastionlaw.ca/-criminal.index.asp to http://www.bastionlaw.ca/-criminal.index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:45, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article claims, quite seriously, that the jury system "was gradually superseded by an "engine of tyranny and oppression"[5][citation needed] in Germany,". I beg to differ, and find this approach outrageously biased.  Yes, it is a quote, but it is used as main text in the article, and it is not critically questioned. As evidence we are offered two sources unavailable to the cursory reader, one of them from the 19th century.  Despite the many absurd failings of the jury system, the article here unilaterally declares it superior to the equally valid system of professional judges prevalent in many countries, Germany among them. I will remove this bullshit passage and replace it with a neutral text. Wefa (talk) 20:54, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "engine of tyranny and oppression"?? NPOV, anyone?