Trang luyện nghe tiếng Anh trực tuyến

Người trí dù khoảnh khắc kề cận bậc hiền minh, cũng hiểu ngay lý pháp, như lưỡi nếm vị canh.Kinh Pháp Cú - Kệ số 65

Cơ hội thành công thực sự nằm ở con người chứ không ở công việc. (The real opportunity for success lies within the person and not in the job. )Zig Ziglar

Nhiệm vụ của con người chúng ta là phải tự giải thoát chính mình bằng cách mở rộng tình thương đến với muôn loài cũng như toàn bộ thiên nhiên tươi đẹp. (Our task must be to free ourselves by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature and its beauty.)Albert Einstein

Người khôn ngoan học được nhiều hơn từ một câu hỏi ngốc nghếch so với những gì kẻ ngốc nghếch học được từ một câu trả lời khôn ngoan. (A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer.)Bruce Lee

Vui thay, chúng ta sống, Không hận, giữa hận thù! Giữa những người thù hận, Ta sống, không hận thù!Kinh Pháp Cú (Kệ số 197)

Tôi chưa bao giờ học hỏi được gì từ một người luôn đồng ý với tôi. (I never learned from a man who agreed with me. )Dudley Field Malone

Nếu muốn có những điều chưa từng có, bạn phải làm những việc chưa từng làm.Sưu tầm

Một số người mang lại niềm vui cho bất cứ nơi nào họ đến, một số người khác tạo ra niềm vui khi họ rời đi. (Some cause happiness wherever they go; others whenever they go.)Oscar Wilde

Chúng ta nhất thiết phải làm cho thế giới này trở nên trung thực trước khi có thể dạy dỗ con cháu ta rằng trung thực là đức tính tốt nhất. (We must make the world honest before we can honestly say to our children that honesty is the best policy. )Walter Besant

Đừng làm cho người khác những gì mà bạn sẽ tức giận nếu họ làm với bạn. (Do not do to others what angers you if done to you by others. )Socrates

Hãy nhớ rằng, có đôi khi im lặng là câu trả lời tốt nhất.Đức Đạt-lai Lạt-ma XIV

Trang chủ »» Danh mục »» Trang luyện nghe tiếng Anh trực tuyến »» Đang nghe bài: Trial By Jury »»

You are listening to the article: Trial By Jury
Listen and check your understanding by viewing the text.

» VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT « » VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT «

If you are a citizen of Canada or the United States, it is very likely that you will be
summoned at some time for jury duty. A letter will come in the mail, telling you to report
to a certain place at a given time. There are legal penalties for not attending, because jury
duty is considered every citizen's responsibility. Often a large number of people, perhaps
several hundred, will be summoned at one time.
When you arrive, you will join a lineup of others who are registering for duty. Eventually,
you will get to a table and talk to an official. If you have a special reason for not being a
juror, such as ill health, you may be excused at this point. Those not immediately
exempted become a part of a jury panel. Out of this panel, a number of juries of twelve
people will be chosen. These will decide a variety of criminal cases over the next few
weeks.
What follows is the experience of one woman in a jury pool. She went with the others
into a large courtroom where they spent the whole day. At the front of the courtroom
were the judge, and the lawyers for the prosecution and for the defence. One of the
lawyers explained what the case was going to be about. The names of the jury panel
were in a box at the front. When someone's name was called, they went up to the front of
the courtroom.
The person called up would then have a chance to explain why they couldn't serve as a
juror, if there was some reason preventing them. For example, one woman was
dismissed because she knew the accused. The first jury to be chosen was for a burglary
case. A panel member went forward and faced the accused. Then the lawyers in the trial
decided whether the juror was satisfactory to them. At lunchtime, the panel was
dismissed for an hour.
The second jury was to try someone on a charge of murder. Usually the panel was told
approximately how long the trial might be. Since jurors are not usually paid, many would
like to avoid being involved in a long trial. The woman was called forward and had to look
the man accused of murder in the eye. This made her quite nervous. Judging by her
expression, the two lawyers would decide whether they wanted her on the jury or not.
The defence lawyer would try to choose someone who seemed sympathetic to the man
accused. The prosecutor would prefer someone who was not sympathetic. The woman
excused herself by saying that she had a very young child to look after and no relatives
to help. She was allowed to go home at the end of the day.
Some people wonder whether it is fair for lawyers to dismiss jurors who may not be
sympathetic to their cases. For example, defence lawyers may try to choose young
people if they think that these will be less severe to their clients. In the case above, the
lawyer seemed to prefer women to men. This means that a lot of people are dismissed
from being jurors without a good reason.
One principle of the jury system, however, is to protect the rights of the accused
particularly well. One might say that the jury system is biased in favour of the defendant.
This is why defence lawyers have an opportunity to dismiss people who they think will
not be favourable to their clients.
Furthermore, having twelve jurors gives the defence a good opportunity for a successful
defence. If the defence attorney can raise a reasonable doubt about the guilt of his client
in even one juror, then the accused has a chance of being released. This happened in the
O.J. Simpson murder trial. There, even though there was strong evidence that Simpson
committed the crime, the defence was able to insinuate some doubts among the jurors.
Moreover, the defence lawyers may be able to appeal to the emotions of the jurors,
particularly if they can think of a way to gain sympathy for their client.
For this reason, defence lawyers are more likely to choose trial by jury over trial by judge
alone. A judge is less likely to be swayed by emotion than a jury. And a defence attorney
may also prefer a criminal trial to a civil suit. In the latter case, the client does not have to
be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt but will be found liable if the preponderance
of evidence is against him or her. This is why O.J. Simpson was acquitted on criminal
charges, but then found liable for damages in a civil suit.

» CHOOSE LEVEL «

Quý vị đang truy cập từ IP 216.73.216.129 và chưa ghi danh hoặc đăng nhập trên máy tính này. Nếu là thành viên, quý vị chỉ cần đăng nhập một lần duy nhất trên thiết bị truy cập, bằng email và mật khẩu đã chọn.
Chúng tôi khuyến khích việc ghi danh thành viên ,để thuận tiện trong việc chia sẻ thông tin, chia sẻ kinh nghiệm sống giữa các thành viên, đồng thời quý vị cũng sẽ nhận được sự hỗ trợ kỹ thuật từ Ban Quản Trị trong quá trình sử dụng website này.
Việc ghi danh là hoàn toàn miễn phí và tự nguyện.

Ghi danh hoặc đăng nhập

Thành viên đang online:

Viên Hiếu Thành

Huệ Lộc 1959

Bữu Phước

Chúc Huy

Minh Pháp Tự

minh hung thich

Diệu Âm Phúc Thành

Phan Huy Triều

Phạm Thiên

Trương Quang Quý

Johny

Dinhvinh1964

Pascal Bui

Vạn Phúc

Giác Quý

Trần Thị Huyền

Chanhniem Forever

NGUYỄN TRỌNG TÀI

KỲ

Dương Ngọc Cường

Mr. Device

Tri Huynh

Thích Nguyên Mạnh

Thích Quảng Ba

T TH

Tam Thien Tam

Nguyễn Sĩ Long

caokiem

hoangquycong

Lãn Tử

Ton That Nguyen

ngtieudao

Lê Quốc Việt

Du Miên

Quang-Tu Vu

phamthanh210

An Khang 63

zeus7777

Trương Ngọc Trân

Diệu Tiến ... ...

... ...

««
»» Đang nghe bài: Trial By Jury

» VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT « » VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT «

» CHOOSE LEVEL «

Tiếp tục nghe? 🎧

««»» Đang nghe bài: Trial By Jury

» VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT « » VIEW TEXT / HIDE TEXT «

» CHOOSE LEVEL «

Tiếp tục nghe? 🎧

««
»» Đang nghe bài: Trial By Jury