6 Jurors versus 12 Jurors ... who will this benefit?

one_hooah_wife

Loving Colorado!
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
10
There will only be 6 jurors seated for this case, as it stands, to this date:

Florida Statute 913.10 Number of jurors.
--Twelve persons shall constitute a jury to try all capital cases, and six persons shall constitute a jury to try all other criminal cases.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/...913/ch0913.htm

Florida typically seats only 6 jurors in a criminal case ... unless the death penalty is "on the table."

Who will, if anyone, this benefit?

Facts:

The US Supreme Court decision in WILLIAMS v. FLORIDA, 399 U.S. 78 (1970) 399 U.S. 78, decided that a jury of 6 or more did not violate the defendants 6th Amendment right to a fair trial.

To have a hung jury, only one juror would have to hold out. That is 1:6 odds versus (if the state had opted for the DP) a 1:12 odds, for KC to have a hung jury. It only takes one!!

Who does this benefit in your opinion?
 
It appears to me that it will benefit the prosecution by only having to convice 6jurors of guilt, rather than 12. The odds of getting one wacko, KC loving jury member are reduced by half!
 
Some could look at it as fewer jurors seated ... fewer jurors to convince ... on either side!
 
We've talked about this on other threads when reference was made to "12 people."

All trials (except dp) in Florida use only 6 jurors so the SA and defense attorney are used to this. In fact, I would say that the majority of SA's and Defense A's here in Florida have never tried a case with 12 jurors.

On one side you can say that there are less people to convince of guilt and on the other side you can say there are less people to influence someone who has doubt. Personally, I don't think either side benefits one way or the other.
 
This really made my day. Instead of having 12, she will have 6.. this may be the reason why the took the DP off the table. The cards are stacked in the favor of the prosecution b/c it's 6 less folks to worry about.
 
It appears to me that it will benefit the prosecution by only having to convice 6jurors of guilt, rather than 12. The odds of getting one wacko, KC loving jury member are reduced by half!


:blowkiss:
 
I'm amazed there will be only 6 jurrors. I've been here every day since July and never came across this info before. Duh.
 
Is this only in Florida?

Well, I have not looked at other state law ... and I am most familiar with TN and AL law .... so I do not know ... keep in mind this is a state's law matter ... for this case ... I Have referenced FL Law only!
 
Not to be a kill-joy but if I were the only hold-out against convicting someone, I'd be more willing to yield to the opposing opinion of 11 other people, than I would be willing to yield to the opposing opinion of only 5 others. I'm not implying that I'd been more intimidated if eleven people ganged up on me. Rather, I mean that I'd be more willing to doubt/question my own judgment if 11 people adamantly disagreed with me. If there were only 5 people who saw things the opposite of me, I'd be more inclined to shrug that off, stand firm, and try to bring them around.

Lately, I notice I'm using a lot more words to try to explain myself, but not doing a better job of it. LOL. So, to reduce all the above to one sentence: I'd be more willing to question my own judgment if 11 other people thought I was dead-wrong, than I'd be if only 5 people thought that.
 
Seems to me that having only 6 jurors benefits the prosecution.
 
I'd be more willing to question my own judgment if 11 other people thought I was dead-wrong, than I'd be if only 5 people thought that.


Certainly one way to look at it and I don't disagree.

I think it works from both angles 50/50....


But...

What if you had two hold outs on a conviction in a group of 12 that you had to convince... or even three?

Cutting the jury down to six, imo, cuts down on deliberation time.

If I were a juror, I would rather deliberate with five other people than a group of twelve. With a smaller group, it's easier to discuss and you have less cross talk... To me, it's simply more focused.
 
I don't know if the 6:1 odds versus 12:1 odds works when talking about the chances of one juror holding out. I've long believed 12 people on a jury is too many, because instead of convincing 6 minds, you have to convince 12. We recently had a very important trial of a public official here. It was a mistrial because of 1 juror out of 12.. and this guy is so obviously guilty. Now taxpayers will have to cough up more cash to do it all over again.
 
I have served on a jury of 12 in an other state and also on a jury of 6 in Florida. The jury of 6 was much easier.
 
Altho I agree with Friday's comment, I also feel that lowering the number of jurors makes the jury feel more close. I know I would feel much closer with 5 other people I had come to sit with day after day than I would 11. Then during final deliberation to see those 5 other people felt she was guilty, I might be more keen to hearing them out and reconsidering than I would a larger amount of people I felt less of a connection with. That's JMO.
 
Since the defense will be looking for a moron, it would seem to me that finding 1 in 6 would be harder than finding 1 in 12. :crazy:
 
Certainly one way to look at it and I don't disagree.

I think it works from both angles 50/50....


But...

What if you had two hold outs on a conviction in a group of 12 that you had to convince... or even three?

Cutting the jury down to six, imo, cuts down on deliberation time.

If I were a juror, I would rather deliberate with five other people than a group of twelve. With a smaller group, it's easier to discuss and you have less cross talk... To me, it's simply more focused.

I don't disagree at all. :)
 
Not to be a kill-joy but if I were the only hold-out against convicting someone, I'd be more willing to yield to the opposing opinion of 11 other people, than I would be willing to yield to the opposing opinion of only 5 others. I'm not implying that I'd been more intimidated if eleven people ganged up on me. Rather, I mean that I'd be more willing to doubt/question my own judgment if 11 people adamantly disagreed with me. If there were only 5 people who saw things the opposite of me, I'd be more inclined to shrug that off, stand firm, and try to bring them around.

Lately, I notice I'm using a lot more words to try to explain myself, but not doing a better job of it. LOL. So, to reduce all the above to one sentence: I'd be more willing to question my own judgment if 11 other people thought I was dead-wrong, than I'd be if only 5 people thought that.
I understand what you're saying, and you bring up a good point. :)
 
Seems to me that having only 6 jurors benefits the prosecution.
I think it all goes back to who is on the jury and not necessarily the number of jurors. Even with only 6, the state still needs to carefully weed out the potential pro-defense ones during voir dire.
 
Good question.

For anyone willing to wade through it, the U.S. Bureau of Justice provides a plethora of statistics here. I didn't see anything on a quick review that would help this discussion, but...it was a quick look.

The best approach I can think of regarding this question would be to ask it in the extremes and see if it makes a difference.

Would a jury of 1 benefit either?
Would a jury of 1,000 benefit either?

I can only give a biased answer, but, IMHO, when there is sufficient evidence to make the case - which I believe we'll see in this one - increasing the jury size has the effect of jury behavior increasingly simulating the behavior of the mass population and finding individuals whose definition of "reasonable" varies widely from the 'norm' and would therefore be willing to hold out for the defense.

So...with no better argument than that...I'd say 6 benefits the SA more than the defense...if ever so slightly. Since the Supreme Court upheld it, perhaps there were some statistics presented @ the time showing no bias 6 vs. 12...maybe.

You may also consider the juror selection process. Are there any benefits one way or the other in the selection process SA vs. defense? Selection...regardless of 6 or 12...is make or break.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
1,479
Total visitors
1,591

Forum statistics

Threads
589,179
Messages
17,915,179
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top