Jurors are critical players in the United States judicial system. In fact, the sixth amendment of the Constitution states that all accused defendants have the right to a trial by jury. Traditionally, juries have been composed of 12 members, all without preconceived biases about the case and ideally representing a varying aspect of the community. In the case of Williams v. Florida of 1970, the Supreme Court ruled that six-member juries were not unconstitutional, as the Constitution never specifically define a jury as consisting of 12 members (a ruling that was later overturned). Rather, six members were deemed acceptable, as they displayed the “essential features” of a jury. Six-person juries are attractive, as they save costs and time for the prosecution, and can potentially provide a speedier trial for the defendant (Pearce, 2009). Among the most notorious cases to be tried by a six-member jury was the second-degree murder charge of George Zimmerman.
George Zimmerman was a community watch volunteer of his neighborhood in Florida. Surveying from his car and armed with a gun, on February 26, 2012, Zimmerman called local police to report a suspicious person in his views. This suspicious person was 17-year-old, African American, Trayvon Martin. Though instructed by the police to not take action, Zimmerman confronted Martin, which ended with Zimmerman fatally shooting Martin. Zimmerman immediately claimed self-defense, as evidenced by his bleeding head and nose (Slifer, 2013). The shooting quickly exploded on a national level as being an act of racism that a white man report an African-American teen as being suspicious and proceeding to fatally wound him out of “self-defense”. Although, to the surprise of many, Zimmerman was later revealed to be Hispanic.
It has been speculated that six-member juries put a defendant at a disadvantage. As shown in studies conducted by Solomon Asch, individuals often cannot fight the temptation to conform to the majority, especially in smaller groups. Hence, despite being proportionately equivalent, one disagreeing juror out of six is more likely to conform to the views of the other five jurors than the same scenario by two out of 12 jurors. This is because an individual finds the courage to resist conformity among the agreement of another reluctant individual. Deviating opinions between jurors are of serious concern, particularly in criminal cases, where guilt must be proved “beyond a reasonable doubt” (PSU, WC, 2016). For this reason, the constitutional fairness of six-member juries was overturned in 1978, in Ballew v. Georgia, when the Supreme Court ruled that six-member juries were a serious threat to constitutional rights (Pearce, 2009). However, studies that have been conducted comparing 12 to six-member juries, suggest that six-member juries are not significantly different in their ability to 1) Engage in group deliberation 2) Be influenced by external intimidation 3) Display a fair representation of the community 4) Reach similar verdicts and conclusions to 12-person juries (Pearce, 2009).
On the charge of second-degree murder and pleading not guilty by reason of self-defense, Zimmerman’s trial commended in June 2013, under the judgment of six female jurors: five Caucasian and one Hispanic. In a nationally known, criminal case, was this jury selection fair to the accused George Zimmerman or the deceased victim, Trayvon Martin (Slifer, 2013)?
Based on the ruling of Ballew v. Georgia, and the conclusions of the human psyche made by Asch, the Zimmerman trial was unfair to both Zimmerman and Martin. According to Florida statute 913.10, 12-person juries will be provided for all trials of capital crimes and all other criminal cases may be tried by six (Slifer, 2013). Therefore, Zimmerman’s second-degree charge did not qualify for the mandatory oversight of 12 jurors. Concerning the media following and national uproar of the crime, it’s curious that 12 jurors were not recruited on behalf of ensuring Zimmerman’s constitutional right to a fair trial. On behalf of Trayvon Martin, the jury which was selected for his killer’s trial was not representative of a diverse cross-section of the community. Not one juror represented the African-American community, the community to which Martin belonged. Selecting 12 jurors has a stronger potential to represent the necessary diversity
While Florida stats laws uphold the ruling of Williams v. Florida, and allow six-member juries in any criminal case below the capital level, the method is far from bulletproof. It should be part of the law to enact fair judgement, assess each case separately and make decisions in the best interest of the people in the case. The George Zimmerman case was juried by six members with minimal demographic variety. The time and money that are able to be saved by the employment of a six-member jury in criminal cases is not equivalent to the constitutional threats that made to victims and defendants.
References:
Pearce, M. W., Wingrove, T. (2009). Is a jury of six as good as one of 12? American Psychological Association. 40 (7): 32. Retrieved from URL: http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/07-08/jn.aspx
Pennsylvania State University: World Campus. 2016. Lesson 8: The Legal System/Criminal Justice. DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY: PSYCH 424.
Slifer, S. (2013). George Zimmerman trial: why are only six jurors weighing murder suspect’s fate? CBS News. Retrieved from URL: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-zimmerman-trial-why-are-only-six-jurors-weighing-murder-suspects-fate/
Your post is very interesting. I also wrote about jury size in my blog post. The Supreme Court declares jury size does not matter in William v. Florida in 1970, that “the 12-man panel is not a necessary ingredient of ’trial by jury’”. The Court stated that 6-person juries can save more money and time for the prosecution and provide a quick trial for the defendant.
As you mentioned, the number of juries in any criminal case should be part of the law for fair judgment. There are some reasons why I believe more juries make sense. More juries can have effective group deliberation so they are exposed to less error-prone, less variability, and likely to have accurate decision.