My persuasive argument thesis is: To get more acceptable judgments, Civic Participation in Criminal Trials should exist.
1. What do people already know about my topic?
Everyone knows that civic participation in jurisdiction is faint. Everyone knows civic participation in criminal trials will help people to assert their opinion to the judgement.
2. What research has already been done about my topic?
http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2014/07/emphasize-the-civic-role-of-your-civil-trial.html
- Good suggestions of making juries' trial more civic by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm
http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2012/12/consider-the-jurys-political-role.html - Good analysis of political roles of civil juries. It is useful to support my opinion.
- Good suggestions of making juries' trial more civic by Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm
http://www.persuasivelitigator.com/2012/12/consider-the-jurys-political-role.html - Good analysis of political roles of civil juries. It is useful to support my opinion.
3. What are the implications of my argument (What if I'm right? What if I'm right and people ignore me?)
If people ignore me, they will confront the big wall between jurisdiction and nations.
If people ignore me, they will confront the big wall between jurisdiction and nations.
My Narration
Participating in criminal trials seems gorgeous and easy. However, they have a huge possibility to verdict correctly. The most important part of the juries' role is checking on placing too much power in the government's prosecutorial hands. According to the Solomon J.M., juries are important as Juries more often than not bring a common sense and a collective wisdom that would be missing if we relied on judges alone. The jury's capacity as a political institution and a public voice may well be part of the client's thinking. Let's take an example. If I had a problem but my attorney cannot understand my thought, I cannot exert my opinion about my behavior exactly and will get inappropriate punishment. In that case, if the juries understood my feelings, they will work for me. Also my satisfaction of jurisdiction will be increased. It could not be done if there were not juries who have another aspects of seeing incident from judges.
People already know that civic participation in jurisdiction is faint. As the essay (I referred before) said, civic participation in jurisdiction means exerting national opinion in the process of judgement. Before this system was implemented, nations should get punished according to the judgement rendered by a judge and the law. It occur many problems. Let's think about the situation that a man is caught because of murder committed because of personal reason. Although he has a reason for his behavior, it cannot be accepted in the aspects of law. Since the law and the judges tend to consider results more importantly than the motivation they did so. Also if the dock want to reveal his of her innocent, they should adduce the evidence to plead self-defense. It is hard because most of their motivation is related to emotional factors. Therefore, most of them are easy to be frustrated. However, if in this situation, there were juries, they could understand the dock's motivation. Since juries do not need to consider the exact evidence and they are on the aspects of the public. They can understand the dock's opinion emotionally and agree with their opinion freely. It may help the decrease of falsely charged person. Also people's satisfaction of jurisdiction will be increased. Because it will more contain the thoughts of the public through mirroring juries' opinion which represent the public's opinion. Therefore, we can say that civic participation in criminal trials also connect nations and jurisdictions or judgments.
Then, it can solve the problem that nations are indifferent to jurisdiction. As we are under the law used to judge, we should pay attention to the judgement. However, many people do not concern about that because they think trial and judgement is far from them. Or some people were irritated with the system that nations cannot participated in trials. They say civic participation in criminal trials should increase the degree of attention people pay for our jurisdiction and it will lead to develop of Korean Jurisdiction.
Although some people say civic participation in criminal trials lead to many problems and it is not fit for judgement, civic participation in criminal trials should exist to get acceptable results, to reflect more nations' opinions to jurisdiction or to make people participate in jurisdiction.
People already know that civic participation in jurisdiction is faint. As the essay (I referred before) said, civic participation in jurisdiction means exerting national opinion in the process of judgement. Before this system was implemented, nations should get punished according to the judgement rendered by a judge and the law. It occur many problems. Let's think about the situation that a man is caught because of murder committed because of personal reason. Although he has a reason for his behavior, it cannot be accepted in the aspects of law. Since the law and the judges tend to consider results more importantly than the motivation they did so. Also if the dock want to reveal his of her innocent, they should adduce the evidence to plead self-defense. It is hard because most of their motivation is related to emotional factors. Therefore, most of them are easy to be frustrated. However, if in this situation, there were juries, they could understand the dock's motivation. Since juries do not need to consider the exact evidence and they are on the aspects of the public. They can understand the dock's opinion emotionally and agree with their opinion freely. It may help the decrease of falsely charged person. Also people's satisfaction of jurisdiction will be increased. Because it will more contain the thoughts of the public through mirroring juries' opinion which represent the public's opinion. Therefore, we can say that civic participation in criminal trials also connect nations and jurisdictions or judgments.
Then, it can solve the problem that nations are indifferent to jurisdiction. As we are under the law used to judge, we should pay attention to the judgement. However, many people do not concern about that because they think trial and judgement is far from them. Or some people were irritated with the system that nations cannot participated in trials. They say civic participation in criminal trials should increase the degree of attention people pay for our jurisdiction and it will lead to develop of Korean Jurisdiction.
Although some people say civic participation in criminal trials lead to many problems and it is not fit for judgement, civic participation in criminal trials should exist to get acceptable results, to reflect more nations' opinions to jurisdiction or to make people participate in jurisdiction.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기