The Jury is the Great Equalizer. The common man centuries ago and the criminal defendant today are protected by the Jury trial requirements of American Constitutional and English Common Law. Without a jury, nearly every defendant would be declared guilty by a government appointed magistrate, and fairness, equality and justice would be unknown. But a Jury gets to make the final decision of whether or not a defendant is guilty, and this gives people hope and protection of their rights.

Recent cases in the news shed some illumination on this subject. Whether famous and high-profile, or someone you've never heard of, Juries can declare a defendant Not Guilty in cases where the prosecutors have insisted on the defendant's guilt. Would a politically appointed and income motivatd Judge conclude the defendant is Not Guilty? Rarely, and when a Judge hears a trial without a jury and finds the defendants Not Guilty, it frequently has all the appearance of politics and back-room influence. An example, recently, several New York City police officers were found NOT GUILTY in shooting to death a black man after his bachelor party, where they were tried by a Judge, without a Jury. If the roles were reversed, would the bachelor receive that same benefit from a Judge without a Jury? NO WAY!

Most Judges are former Prosecutors. Their ways of thinking don't change overnight when they become judges. There are only two or three judges in all of Utah that I would trust to give a defendant the same fairness as a Jury.

A Jury of your peers consists of every day, regular people from all walks of life, who lend their common sense, personal life knowledge and experience, and their freedom from the political pressures a judge feels. And this is why Access Legal's Attorneys always demand a Jury Trial in every case and for every client we represent who has been charged with a criminal offense. If your case goes to trial, you want a Jury, not a Judge, to decide your fate.

Edward D. Flint, Attorney
Access Legal