Changes

A jury trial is a trial by one's peers.  The term usually applies to a jury composed of random citizens in the community where the crime occurred.

A jury trial is a trial by one's peers.  The term usually applies to a jury composed of random citizens in the community where the crime occurred.

Both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams felt strongly that jury trials were the best defense against government. Thomas Jefferson considered "trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution." John Adams said it was a jury's "duty ... to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court."

 

Both Thomas Jefferson and John Adams felt strongly that jury trials were the best defense against government. Thomas Jefferson considered "trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution." John Adams said it was a jury's "duty ... to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court." In recent times, the right to trial by jury has been under attack in America, most notably in the [[Patriot act]] and the "war on terror", where the executive branch has argued that persons accused of terrorism are not guaranteed the right to a trial by jury.

Taking a broad view of "jury" to include any panel of people (other than a judge) to pass judgment on an accused, here are the top ten most influential trials affecting American history:

Taking a broad view of "jury" to include any panel of people (other than a judge) to pass judgment on an accused, here are the top ten most influential trials affecting American history:

# Colonel [[Billy Mitchell]] (1925)

# Colonel [[Billy Mitchell]] (1925)

# [[Alger Hiss]] (1949)

# [[Alger Hiss]] (1949)

# President [[William Jefferson Clinton|Bill Clinton]] (1999)

# O. J. Simpson (two trials)

Half of these important trials resulted in convictions; the other half resulted in acquittals. Here is a summary of the cases and their influence:

Half of these important trials resulted in convictions; the other half resulted in acquittals. Here is a summary of the cases and their influence:

10. President Clinton was riding his in the polls and ready to pick his successor for the White House by late 1998. His leadership enabled the Democratic Party to do surprisingly well in the mid-term elections, and President Clinton was seeking to leave a lasting legacy.

10. In a famous recent trial, former football star O. J. Simpson was acquitted by a jury of the crime of murdering his wife.  The key argument in the trial was that the prosecutions' key witness, the policeman who gathered most of the evidence in the case, was shown to have lied, and the jury apparently found the argument that he may have tampered with the evidence credible, at least to the extent of giving them a "reasonable doubt."   In an apparently contradictory finding, a different jury found in a civil case ("lawsuit") that O. J. Simpson was responsible for the death of his wife, and assessed civil penalties. Since the standards of proof is "preponderance of evidence" in a civil case, however, it is much easier to prove civil liability to a jury than it is to prove criminal guilt, and hance these results are not necessarily contradictory.

 

Then the House of Representatives impeached him for making false statements under oath, which is perjury, and trial was scheduled for the Senate in 1999. First Lady Hillary Clinton accused her opponents of being part of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" against her husband. The Democratic Senators all lined up behind President Clinton, promising to vote for acquittal.

 

Republicans enjoyed a majority in the Senate but lacked votes anywhere close to the requisite 2/3rd majority to convict. President Clinton was a lame-duck at that point anyway, and the real battle was over his ability to influence politics beyond his term.

 

The managers of the impeachment presented their case, but the Senate prevented them from calling key witnesses such as Clinton’s closest aids. The procedural rules hamstrung the trial and served to protect the president. Without the presentation of the full case, President Clinton easily survived the final vote.

 

But the victory was Pyrrhic. The Democratic presidential nominee in 2000, Al Gore, felt he had to distance himself from Clinton and that probably made the difference on Election Day. Since then, Clinton has had little success in campaigning for candidates, recently failing with Governor Gray Davis in California in the recall. Hillary Clinton, pollsters choice to run in 2004, apparently feels it is too soon to make an attempt. The political ramifications of the impeachment trial continue.