The Instigator
The4416Instigator
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
dutchrock
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Another Superior Judicial System Than the American Jury System can be Implemented Effectively

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/31/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 793 times Debate No: 34384
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

The4416Instigator

Con

Debate: Another Superior Judicial System Than the American Jury System can be Implemented Effectively (in the United States)

I have agreed with dutchrock to this debate. I will be taking the Con side and he the Pro. Round Format will be:

Round 1: Acceptance / Definitions

Round 2: Affirmative Arguments

Round 3: Rebuttals / Responses

Round 4: Rebuttals / Responses

Round 5: Rebuttals / Responses

Definitions:

Superior: More Just

Jury System: The American Judicial System that utilises juries selected from the public

Implemented: put (a decision, plan, agreement, etc.) into effect (Oxford Dictionaries)

Effectively: Such that it serves the purpose of the judicial system; i.e. able to deliver more just verdicts.

Dutchrock will take the Burden of Proof.
dutchrock

Pro

I accept this debate.

I agree with the definitions posted and accept the burden of proof, as that is the nature of my position.

I will base my argument both on justice systems internationally that work better than the American justice system, and systems that would work better. As it is not specified I will be allowed to use justice systems that aren't in the constitution or technically un-constitutional. We will assume that the superior judicial system can over-ride the sections of the constitution it may over-ride (I don't know if it will as I am not American, nor have I read or skimmed it, and I do not have a thorough knowledge of it).

Now I will introduce my argument: I believe that there is a far superior Judicial system that can be implemented in the United States of America.
I will start by showing that the Jury system has faults.

I base this belief on the fact that near to no person without training can make decisions without emotions, or personal beliefs getting involved. I will provide evidence for this;
Many people, especially in several Southern states of the US are very conservative. Thus they are often homophobic. In several Southern states, there have recently been a series of convictions of homosexual teenagers. These teenagers are charged for child abuse, or sexual assault of a minor. One example is Matthew Limon, who was one week past his 18th birthday when he engaged in a consensual sex act with another boy. The boy was not even 15, yet there was no violence involved in the act. Limon was charged with criminal sodomy. This is reasonable, considering the age difference (even if there is a romeo and juliet act in Kansas.) However if he had committed sodomy on a girl he would have faced only 15 months in prison, now he faces 17 years. This is because of the romeo and Juliet act, which applies only to heterosexual couples. Now this in itself is an unfair law. However the jury could have ruled it for the same length of time. This has happened before in few cases, but in the majority of cases, this would allow the jury to sentence them to the full account of battery, statutory rape etc. The jury ruled based on the fact that he was a homosexual, and that is a bias they took into the court with them.

That is why I say one should not pick jury's at random from local areas. I say do away with the current jury system, and bring in experts. Judges have to be educated in law, as do lawyers. Those are the good parts of the current system, I've always wondered why you would not have an educated jury. The jury currently could be, I mean this in no way to be insulting, anywhere from incredibly well educated and smart people, to a bunch of rednecks and high school drop-outs with no concept of law. Now I realise one could argue that they represent the different areas of society, that is not what law is. It is about justice, and about what one deserves and the severeness of the crime. I would make jury a profession. One that you must study, not only law for, but also learn to detach yourself for. Per example. If the jury in the previous example had been able to detach itself from the case, than the boy, Matthew, most probably would have gotten 15 months. An educated jury would rid most of these unjust rulings from the courts, and the justice system would simply work better.

I will rest my case there for today, as this is only an introduction into my idea of this system I will
a) describe the actual working of the system I would prefer, as well as rebuttle my opponents points in the next round
b) assume that the prosecution of homosexual teens is enough proof of the fault in the american jury system
Debate Round No. 1
The4416Instigator

Con

The4416Instigator forfeited this round.
dutchrock

Pro

My opponent has forfeited this round, I would like an explanation, as well as an argument next round. It's no fun shooting fish in a barrell, nor is it fun debating an opponent when they forfeit a round. To show some sportsmanship I will re-level the playing field and not argue in this round either. I eagerly await you next argument.
Debate Round No. 2
The4416Instigator

Con

The4416Instigator forfeited this round.
dutchrock

Pro

dutchrock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
The4416Instigator

Con

The4416Instigator forfeited this round.
dutchrock

Pro

dutchrock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
The4416Instigator

Con

The4416Instigator forfeited this round.
dutchrock

Pro

dutchrock forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.