Miscalculation or Change of Circumstances †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Miscalculation or Change of Circumstances. Answer: In the general context, the phrase margin of error refers to the small amount that is permitted in case of any miscalculation or change of circumstances. In the legal parlance, the phrase signifies the fact that the juries sometimes make decisions that are incorrect and make errors while making a decision whether the accused is guilty or not guilty. There are several reasons that justify error the juries make while making decisions. They include incomplete or misleading evidence o failure in reasoning owing to the evidence or complexity of the law or the evidence (De Vos, 2017). This term may be described as the rate of accuracy in the decision made by the Juries. As discussed above that the Juries often err in making decisions due to the misleading or incomplete evidences that causes them to take inaccurate decisions. A good reference is the present case 12 Angry Men where the juries merely believed on the testimonies given by the old man and a woman who lived next to the accused boys house (De Vos, 2017). Majority of the juries believed in the testimonies without paying more attention to the other circumstantial facts that were relevant to the case. Any individual who is sitting in the trial for the first time must consider the fact that the juries are persons who have been selected to make decision based on the merits of the case without being partial or bias towards the accused or victim. Hence, even if they err or make marginal error, it is basically due to the misleading ro incomplete evidence that have been presented with respect to the case. The most essential point of issue that had caused the jury members to demonstrate some amount of hesitation regarding the guilt of the accused is when Juror No 8 had presented before the jury, the knife that was exactly same as the knife with which the accused has been alleged to have murdered his father (Rose, 2016). Juror 8 was of the opinion that he bought the knife from the junk shop around the corner of the boys house (Rose, 2016). He wanted to establish that the knife purchased by the accused was lost and somebody else found the knife and murdered his father, putting the blame on the accused person. Juror 8 who initially, was the only juror who disagreed with the 11 jurors and stated that the accused person is not guilty argued this ground. The other essential issue that was addressed by Juror 8 was that it was not possible for the old man to hear the boy say Ill kill you while the el train was passing. This is because it takes 10 seconds for the el to pass a given point and it had been going by the window of the old man for 6 seconds or more. Before the old man could hear the boy say Ill kill you and hear the body fall down, the el was passing by his window and it is difficult to even hear what one is thinking, let alone hear what others are saying across the window in that roaring noise (Gale, 2015). A person who is mentally or physically unfit to carry out the duties of the juror or has been convicted of an offense for which death or life imprisonment was awarded. the person is subject to a bond for exhibiting good behavior. The jurors must be impartial and competent to understand and construe the legal proceedings and other matters relevant to the case while making a decision. A hung jury refers to the judicial injury that cannot come to an agreement upon a verdict even after an extended deliberation (Zucker, 2017). A hung jury is a jury that fails to reach the required unanimity or supermajority that is required to agree to a verdict. All the jury members must agree unanimously that the accused is guilty and that the court had proved that the accused is guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. In case there is hung jury, and jurors cannot agree on a verdict unanimously, the case shall be tried again before a new jury. Jury selection is the most important part of any trial procedure and it is equally important that the jurors are impartial while making the decision (De Vos, 2017). However, in the contemporary era, the lawyers usually wish to have jurors who would act partially in favor of their clients. Another essential factor that impedes the selection of impartial person as a jury member is mass media. Jury members are persons who are usually unaware of the case they have been selected to determine. But, mass media hardly make it possible to find jurors who are unaware of cases, especially the high-profile cases in the modern age. Reference list De Vos, W. L. (2017). The Jury Trial in Western Australia: Comparative Observations. Int'l Trade Bus. L. Rev., 20, 287. Rose, R. (2016). Twelve angry men. Bloomsbury Publishing. Gale, C. L. (2015). A Study Guide for Rose Reginald's Twelve Angry Men. Gale, Cengage Learning. Zucker, K. J. (2017). Hung Jury. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1-4.