Difference Between Jury and Judge
Jury vs Judge
A jury is defined as a group of people who are sworn to give a verdict on a case which is given to them by a court, including the meting out of a judgment and penalty. They are tasked to do so in order to have an unbiased judgment on a case and make sure of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
The term “jury” come from the Old French word “juree” which means “oath, inquest, or sworn” which is in turn derived from the Latin word “jurare” meaning “to swear.” There are several types of juries which are the following:
Petit jury or trial jury, which consists of eight jurors wherein evidence is presented by both the plaintiff and the defendant to be heard by the jury. Afterwards, the verdict can either be unanimous or require only a majority of the jury members’ votes.
Grand jury, which consists of twelve jurors wherein evidence is presented by prosecutors who investigate the crime and issue indictments. This is used in a criminal trial wherein the defendant does not have to be notified.
A judge, on the other hand, is an individual who is tasked to preside over a court proceeding. He can either act on his own or with a panel of judges. They hear all evidence presented by witnesses, assess all facts, and decide on a ruling based on his judgment and interpretation of the law.
A judge may work on his own or with a jury. This is called a jury trial wherein the jury determines the guilt or innocence of the accused, and the judge metes out the punishment and simultaneously decides upon the guilt of the accused.
The term “judge” comes from the Latin word “judex” which is derived from the Hebrew word “shophet” from the Old Testament books of the Bible which referred to war leaders who are given temporary powers. Also from the Latin word “judicare” meaning “to examine officially.”
While a jury is in charge of hearing evidence and arguments about the guilt or innocence of a defendant, the judge who works with them is the one who ensures that they decide on a verdict according to the merits of the case.
Summary:
1.A jury is a group of ordinary individuals who are chosen by a court to hear the evidence presented by both the defendant and the plaintiff and gives a verdict on a case while a judge is a person who has studied law and is knowledgeable about it and can be appointed by the government or elected to preside over a court proceeding.
2.A jury can be a group of eight to twelve people and must always work with a judge while a judge can decide on a case by himself without help from a jury, or he can work with a group of judges.
3.The word “jury” comes from the Old French word “juree” which means “oath” or “to swear” while the word “judge” comes from the Latin words “judex” (temporary powers) and “judicare” (examine officially).
- Difference Between Mocha and Coffee - January 11, 2012
- Difference Between Verb and Predicate - January 2, 2012
- Difference Between Tropical Meteorology and Monsoon Meteorology - January 2, 2012
Search DifferenceBetween.net :
Email This Post
: If you like this article or our site. Please spread the word. Share it with your friends/family.
This is a horrible piece.
“While a jury is in charge of hearing evidence and arguments about the guilt or innocence of a defendant, the judge who works with them is the one who ensures that they decide on a verdict according to the merits of the case.”
The judge who works with….. huh? The judge, presiding over a criminal jury trial, is the finder of law, the jury is the finder of fact. And the jury doesn’t control the jury’s interpretation of the merits of the case, the judge decides what is relevant to be introduced into trial and what cannot be considered. Of course with jury nullification that can be out, so the judge doesn’t decide the merits, he/she just controls what comes in.
Also, 49 states’ law system is based upon English Common Law versus Louisiana’s system of ‘Civil Law.’
Lol, mannny innocent people were sent to jail because of this retarded system. People with no knowledge of law deciding if a person goes to jail for the rest of its life.
“All defendants are innocent until proven otherwise” this goes flying through the window with juries. And “Even with the least amount of doubt, one shall be free. Better to have a free criminal than an imprisoned innocent”
Please let people in Wisconsin and everywhere know that no one except after being attained by police, then by advice attaining a lawyer or attorney because of hearing real complaints from a person of a real assault, The Judge and his or her court of your case or anyone else’s case, is the only people of law authority that will convict you as a sex offender, not a person who thinks by attaining internet friends and having them acting like a judge and then broadcasting your a sex offender will add you as a real offender or someone acting as a judge telling people by false allegations or unheard or misinterpretations or by of revenge you are a sex offender!
This is happening and revenge artist are tearing families apart and ruining lives and jobs of those persons and their future and also other persons lives of whom are being accused deliberately with no court or background history or even a having a complainer from such activity! It is unruly and vicious attempt to ruin a god persons life period!