wats the difference between jury system and judiciary system?

Answer 1

In judiciary system only the officers of the court i.e. the judge, the lawyers look into the issue involved in a case & with the help of evidence on record & circumstances leads to a judicious conclusion within the framework of enactments involved in the case & according to the framework of law as settled by the higher courts, where as in Jury system few ordinary members of the society are invited to sit along the judge to go through the process of court, these members give the opinion & judgment of the case from their own point off view that may not according to the framework of the law as settled by the higher courts. The drawback in the jury system is members who sit in jury are ordinary people from all walk of life who may or may not be having knowledge of law & legal system, in criminal justice the basic requirement is of the evidence brought on the record & circumstances leading to the offence by the accused, which lawyers & judges with proper legal knowledge & experience can apply to the particular case. What a novice sitting in the jury will not be able to construe these in a case as legal experts do & will be going by the sentiments which usually news media is exploiting nowadays.

Answer 2

In jury trial, a jury of your peer will listen and examine the evidence. Then they all will either agree or disagree to find a persons guilt. In judiciary system, a judge or panel of judges will hear the case and based on evidence and argument presented to them, they will decide the verdict. Jury system is used in the USA and many countries. It is very easy for the prosecutor to manipulate the jury because they are common people and do not have any knowledge about the law. In judiciary system, the judges deal with such issues everyday and can pick up very fast what is going on. There are pros and cons about both system. As a prosecutor, you will get more conviction by having jury than having a judge decide. The judge still controls the court room and procedure during jury trial. Usually he/she will not step in if he/she finds any manipulation being done to convict some one. For example, in USA if a jury is deciding a case in a drug or rape trial, at certain point the prosecutor will arrange for school boys and girls to come in and observe the procedure in the court room. Legally anyone can go and listen. The timing of it is to make a lasting effect on jurys mind that one of these children can be your son or daughter and they may be the victim of such crime. When you apply such technique, jury tend to ignore all evidence and find defendent guilty. That may be the reason lots of death row convictions are being turned over in USA. Thanks to DNA tests. But what about the time spent in prison and ruined life of the innocent defendent's and their family?

Answer 3

In judiciary system only the officers of the court i.e. the judge, the lawyers look into the issue involved in a case & with the help of evidence on record & circumstances leads to a judicious conclusion within the framework of enactments involved in the case & according to the framework of law as settled by the higher courts, where as in Jury system few ordinary members of the society are invited to sit along the judge to go through the process of court, these members give the opinion & judgment of the case from their own point off view that may not according to the framework of the law as settled by the higher courts. The drawback in the jury system is members who sit in jury are ordinary people from all walk of life who may or may not be having knowledge of law & legal system, in criminal justice the basic requirement is of the evidence brought on the record & circumstances leading to the offence by the accused, which lawyers & judges with proper legal knowledge & experience can apply to the particular case. What a novice sitting in the jury will not be able to construe these in a case as legal experts do & will be going by the sentiments which usually news media is exploiting nowadays.

Answer 4

The "Judiciary" is the overall legal system of a country, or sometimes the body of judges in a country. The "jury system" is the United States system (followed in some other countries, originating in England) of using a panel of ordinary citizens (usually 12) to sit in judgment on the facts of a case.

Answer 5

Well,in simple words,Jury system is the process where you are tried by your peers in other words,the common man.A lot is taken and citizens are selected for the Jury Duty.From the selected people there is a screening process to remove any person who might have special interest.
Judicial system is where you are tried by Judges who have ample knowledge of the law.Here the person who decides your case is a professional and knows how law/evidence is supposed to be handled.
India follows the Judicial system,but Jury was common till 1950 where a trial's flawed judgment made Supreme Court to remove Jury from Indian Judicial System!!

Answer 6

Jury is a number of people legally selected to decide a case and find out whether an accused is really guilty of crime. Judiciary is one of the three branches of Government. It administers justice by the judges of a State.

Answer 7

In a jury system such as in USA, ordinary citizens decide matters even though they may have zero knowledge of the law and they may be swayed by personal biases such as caste, community etc. Whereas in a judiciary system such as in India, the judge who is trained and experienced in the law (or certainly ought to be !!), decides the matter in accordance with relevant statutes and established precedent.

Answer 8

The jurors decide on a case tried under the jury system while the judges decide the case in a judicial system.

In the first, the decision is made by jurors who did not actually study law while the decision in the judicial system is made by judges who had a full time in the study of laws.

Answer 9

The Judiciary equipment favor no longer get replaced. what's needed is the peoples energetic participation. Why are the police decision to record a criticism? because they're being pressed hostile to the wall with the help of the sheer type of court docket circumstances of the previous which favor no longer proceed to take record area. let me clarify! *at the same time as someone has a greviance he/she quickly is going to the police station to inn a criticism operating example a case of lost bag/handbag, yet at the same time as an similar man or woman discover it they do no longer sense it necessary to inform the police? with the outcome the police information are clogged with court docket circumstances which neednt be there contained in the first position. This motives the genuine court docket circumstances to be lost contained in the best purchase of not worthy court docket circumstances. an similar is the case with courts. Do your due and issues will paintings. that is continually extra effective to set already present issues excellent fairly than getting into for something new and assorted completely.