Part one on own page
Introduction The right to a trial by jury is a key right under the Bill of Rights, pursuant to the Sixth Amendment. Along with that right comes procedural safeguards to ensure the juror system is functioning within legal parameters. Rules are established for parameters. There are instances where rules are violated. Imagine that you are serving on a jury for a murder trial. The evidence presented at trial is largely circumstantial and, in your mind, equivocal. During the closing arguments, the prosecutor states that you must find the defendant guilty, because he confessed to the crime. This confession was not provided as evidence during the case. The defense attorney immediately objects, and the judge sternly instructs you to disregard the prosecutor’s statement. While you do not know exactly what happened, you suspect that some procedural error excluded the confession. During deliberations, several other jurors commented on the error, including discussing the impact on their position.
· Explain how you would handle what took place in the deliberations.
· Evaluate the implications of a judicial official making improper comments to the jury when such comments are likely to be accorded substantial weight by the jury.
· Discuss a situation from recent events where the jury may have been influenced by judicial comments, even when they were instructed to disregard the comments.
· Analyze the potential ethical and legal issues in the situation in the context of the constitutional right to a trial by jury.
Part tow on own page
Imagine that you are on a promotion committee to recommend to the chief of police a candidate for a captain’s position. All are lieutenants and have received similar scores on the objective tests available for the position.
The candidates are:
· A 39-year-old woman who has been with the police department for 9 years. She has obtained a college degree and a master’s degree by going to school at night. She has spent relatively little time in her career on the street (moving quickly to juvenile, community service, and DARE positions).
· A 46-year-old white male who has also had experience in command positions in the army before joining the police force. He has 15 years of experience—all in patrol positions—and has a college degree.
· A 40-year-old Hispanic male with 10 years of experience. He has been very active with the community. Several community groups have endorsed him, and they demand that there be Hispanic representation on the command staff. He also has strong support among Hispanic officers, serving as their association president. He has a 2-year college degree.
In main post:
· Compare the qualifications of the candidates for promotion in the scenario.
· Determine which of the candidates in the scenario should be promoted and why.
· Describe what information is needed to make an informed decision regarding promotional endorsement.
· Identify additional criteria you would impose if you were in charge of hiring decisions.