Judge and Jury: Key Players in U.S. Courtrooms

The United States has an adversarial legal system. In a count room, two opposing sides come before a judge (and sometimes a jury) to present their cases. The role of the judge and the jury differ when jury trials take place.

There are two general types of proceedings which take place in court–civil and criminal. In civil cases, individuals (or groups of individuals) bring claims against parties they feel have harmed them. In criminal proceedings, a governmental authority prosecutes an individual or entity which it feels has broken the law. Thus, in the famous O.J. Simpson case in the mid-1990s, local authorities in Los Angeles first prosecuted him for the death of his wife, Nicole, and a friend. That was a criminal proceeding. Later, members of Nicole’s family sued Simpson in a civil proceeding. Simpson won the criminal case, but lost the civil one.

Some may shake their heads, wondering how that could be. In each instance, Simpson was effectively charged with having been responsible for the death of two individuals. However, in arguing their cases, prosecutors in criminal proceedings have to meet a higher burden of proof than plaintiff’s attorney’s in civil proceedings. In others words, in criminal proceedings, the standard to meet is “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Put another way, prosecutors are compelled to present evidence which asks a jury to believe–beyond a reasonable doubt–that the accused committed the crime he’s charged with having committed.

In contrast, in a civil proceeding, a plaintiff’s attorney is called upon to persuade jurors, based on a preponderance of the evidence, that the accused is guilty of the crime he’s charged with having committed. As a a result, it tends to be easier to obtain a guilty verdict in civil proceedings than in criminal cases.

No matter what the type of case, a judge and a jury have different roles to play in the proceedings. Since the proceedings are adversarial, they become a contest in which both sides are attempting to convince the judge and jury that their side is right and the other party wrong. In this showdown, the judge and the jury are focusing their attention on different things.

A judge’s role is to make certain that both sides are acting in accordance with the law. This is an important consideration, especially as concerns the presentation of evidence. There are specific rules concerning how evidence is to be gathered and presented. If one side’s attorney challenges how the other is handling the evidence, the judge is called upon to issue a ruling, either allowing or disallowing the challenged evidence and/or action.

Additionally, the judge acts to keep the activities of attorneys (and others) in the courtroom in line with legal requirements. Especially during the questioning of witnesses on the stand, the judge has to respond immediately when either side objects to how the other is handling a witness. In short, within the courtroom, the judge’s obligation is to keep as level a playing field as possible for both side to present their cases.

During the course of a trial, the judge determines whether or not a prosecutor or an attorney for a plaintiff has met his burden of proof, according to the law . That’s why, in some cases, a judge will throw out a jury’s verdict altogether.

Juries, however, must determine the facts of a case. Their role is to listen to the presentation of evidence, decide which side has presented a stronger case, and issue a verdict favoring the side with the stronger case, based on the evidence presented.

As shown in the classic movie 12 Angry Men , starring Henry Fonda, it’s possible for a jury to reject a prosecutor’s interpretation of the evidence and vote to acquit (i.e. free) the accused. In that famous movie, when the jury of 12 men first entered the jury room to begin deliberations, all except one of them was convinced that the accused was guilty. But, as they examined more closely the evidence, they changed their minds.

Since the U.S. legal system subscribes to the belief that a person is innocent until proven guilty, the accused in every case enters court under a presumption of innocence. Within the confines of the courtroom, the skill of attorneys will be the deciding factor in whether or not the judge and jury convict or acquit.

For that reason, anyone facing a trial should get the best legal representation possible.