Sự nguy hại của nóng giận còn hơn cả lửa dữ. Kinh Lời dạy cuối cùng
Không nên nhìn lỗi người, người làm hay không làm.Nên nhìn tự chính mình, có làm hay không làm.Kinh Pháp cú (Kệ số 50)
Thương yêu là phương thuốc diệu kỳ có thể giúp mỗi người chúng ta xoa dịu những nỗi đau của chính mình và mọi người quanh ta.Tủ sách Rộng Mở Tâm Hồn
Hãy thận trọng với những hiểu biết sai lầm. Điều đó còn nguy hiểm hơn cả sự không biết. (Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.)George Bernard Shaw
Người duy nhất mà bạn nên cố gắng vượt qua chính là bản thân bạn của ngày hôm qua. (The only person you should try to be better than is the person you were yesterday.)Khuyết danh
Điều quan trọng không phải là bạn nhìn vào những gì, mà là bạn thấy được những gì. (It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.)Henry David Thoreau
Bạn nhận biết được tình yêu khi tất cả những gì bạn muốn là mang đến niềm vui cho người mình yêu, ngay cả khi bạn không hiện diện trong niềm vui ấy. (You know it's love when all you want is that person to be happy, even if you're not part of their happiness.)Julia Roberts
Nếu bạn nghĩ mình làm được, bạn sẽ làm được. Nhưng nếu bạn nghĩ mình không làm được thì điều đó cũng sẽ trở thành sự thật. (If you think you can, you can. And if you think you can't, you're right.)Mary Kay Ash
Hãy đạt đến thành công bằng vào việc phụng sự người khác, không phải dựa vào phí tổn mà người khác phải trả. (Earn your success based on service to others, not at the expense of others.)H. Jackson Brown, Jr.
Yếu tố của thành công là cho dù đi từ thất bại này sang thất bại khác vẫn không đánh mất sự nhiệt tình. (Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm.)Winston Churchill
Tôi không hóa giải các bất ổn mà hóa giải cách suy nghĩ của mình. Sau đó, các bất ổn sẽ tự chúng được hóa giải. (I do not fix problems. I fix my thinking. Then problems fix themselves.)Louise Hay
Trang chủ««
»» Đang nghe bài: Trial By Jury
You are listening to the article: Trial By Jury
Listen and check your understanding by viewing the text.
» VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT « 
If you are a citizen of Canada or the United States, it is very likely that you will be
summoned at some time for jury duty. A letter will come in the mail, telling you to report
to a certain place at a given time. There are legal penalties for not attending, because jury
duty is considered every citizen's responsibility. Often a large number of people, perhaps
several hundred, will be summoned at one time.
When you arrive, you will join a lineup of others who are registering for duty. Eventually,
you will get to a table and talk to an official. If you have a special reason for not being a
juror, such as ill health, you may be excused at this point. Those not immediately
exempted become a part of a jury panel. Out of this panel, a number of juries of twelve
people will be chosen. These will decide a variety of criminal cases over the next few
weeks.
What follows is the experience of one woman in a jury pool. She went with the others
into a large courtroom where they spent the whole day. At the front of the courtroom
were the judge, and the lawyers for the prosecution and for the defence. One of the
lawyers explained what the case was going to be about. The names of the jury panel
were in a box at the front. When someone's name was called, they went up to the front of
the courtroom.
The person called up would then have a chance to explain why they couldn't serve as a
juror, if there was some reason preventing them. For example, one woman was
dismissed because she knew the accused. The first jury to be chosen was for a burglary
case. A panel member went forward and faced the accused. Then the lawyers in the trial
decided whether the juror was satisfactory to them. At lunchtime, the panel was
dismissed for an hour.
The second jury was to try someone on a charge of murder. Usually the panel was told
approximately how long the trial might be. Since jurors are not usually paid, many would
like to avoid being involved in a long trial. The woman was called forward and had to look
the man accused of murder in the eye. This made her quite nervous. Judging by her
expression, the two lawyers would decide whether they wanted her on the jury or not.
The defence lawyer would try to choose someone who seemed sympathetic to the man
accused. The prosecutor would prefer someone who was not sympathetic. The woman
excused herself by saying that she had a very young child to look after and no relatives
to help. She was allowed to go home at the end of the day.
Some people wonder whether it is fair for lawyers to dismiss jurors who may not be
sympathetic to their cases. For example, defence lawyers may try to choose young
people if they think that these will be less severe to their clients. In the case above, the
lawyer seemed to prefer women to men. This means that a lot of people are dismissed
from being jurors without a good reason.
One principle of the jury system, however, is to protect the rights of the accused
particularly well. One might say that the jury system is biased in favour of the defendant.
This is why defence lawyers have an opportunity to dismiss people who they think will
not be favourable to their clients.
Furthermore, having twelve jurors gives the defence a good opportunity for a successful
defence. If the defence attorney can raise a reasonable doubt about the guilt of his client
in even one juror, then the accused has a chance of being released. This happened in the
O.J. Simpson murder trial. There, even though there was strong evidence that Simpson
committed the crime, the defence was able to insinuate some doubts among the jurors.
Moreover, the defence lawyers may be able to appeal to the emotions of the jurors,
particularly if they can think of a way to gain sympathy for their client.
For this reason, defence lawyers are more likely to choose trial by jury over trial by judge
alone. A judge is less likely to be swayed by emotion than a jury. And a defence attorney
may also prefer a criminal trial to a civil suit. In the latter case, the client does not have to
be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt but will be found liable if the preponderance
of evidence is against him or her. This is why O.J. Simpson was acquitted on criminal
charges, but then found liable for damages in a civil suit.
» CHOOSE LEVEL «
Quý vị đang truy cập từ IP 216.73.216.41 và chưa ghi danh hoặc đăng nhập trên máy tính này. Nếu là thành viên, quý vị chỉ cần đăng nhập một lần duy nhất trên thiết bị truy cập, bằng email và mật khẩu đã chọn.
Chúng tôi khuyến khích việc ghi danh thành viên ,để thuận tiện trong việc chia sẻ thông tin, chia sẻ kinh nghiệm sống giữa các thành viên, đồng thời quý vị cũng sẽ nhận được sự hỗ trợ kỹ thuật từ Ban Quản Trị trong quá trình sử dụng website này.
Việc ghi danh là hoàn toàn miễn phí và tự nguyện.
Ghi danh hoặc đăng nhập
Thành viên đang online:
Viên Hiếu Thành Huệ Lộc 1959 Bữu Phước Chúc Huy Minh Pháp Tự minh hung thich Diệu Âm Phúc Thành Phan Huy Triều Phạm Thiên Trương Quang Quý Johny Dinhvinh1964 Pascal Bui Vạn Phúc Giác Quý Trần Thị Huyền Chanhniem Forever NGUYỄN TRỌNG TÀI KỲ Dương Ngọc Cường Mr. Device Tri Huynh Thích Nguyên Mạnh Thích Quảng Ba T TH Tam Thien Tam Nguyễn Sĩ Long caokiem hoangquycong Lãn Tử Ton That Nguyen ngtieudao Lê Quốc Việt Du Miên Quang-Tu Vu phamthanh210 An Khang 63 zeus7777 Trương Ngọc Trân Diệu Tiến ... ...
... ...
Viên Hiếu Thành Huệ Lộc 1959 Bữu Phước Chúc Huy Minh Pháp Tự minh hung thich Diệu Âm Phúc Thành Phan Huy Triều Phạm Thiên Trương Quang Quý Johny Dinhvinh1964 Pascal Bui Vạn Phúc Giác Quý Trần Thị Huyền Chanhniem Forever NGUYỄN TRỌNG TÀI KỲ Dương Ngọc Cường Mr. Device Tri Huynh Thích Nguyên Mạnh Thích Quảng Ba T TH Tam Thien Tam Nguyễn Sĩ Long caokiem hoangquycong Lãn Tử Ton That Nguyen ngtieudao Lê Quốc Việt Du Miên Quang-Tu Vu phamthanh210 An Khang 63 zeus7777 Trương Ngọc Trân Diệu Tiến ... ... ... ...