juries

简明释义

英[ˈdʒʊəriz]美[ˈdʒʊriz]

n. [法]陪审团（jury 的复数）；评委会

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.Britain is seeking to restrict juries even further.

英国正试图在更大的范围内限制陪审团。

2.This practice was justified by the claim that women were needed at home, and it kept juries unrepresentative of women through the 1960s.

他们为这种做法辩解，声称家里需要女性；于是，陪审团没有女性代表的状况持续了整个20世纪60年代。

3.Other plants will have great years, some may even have no juries at all, measured injuries.

其它工厂将会有丰收的年份，有些甚至没有上报的伤情。

4.In schools, for instance, pupils should be able to see teachers' faces, as should judges and juries in court.

比如说，在学校里，学生应该能够看到老师的脸，在法庭上，犯人也应该能看到法官和陪审团成员的脸。

5.Although women first served on state juries in Utah in 1898, it was not until the 1940s that a majority of states made women eligible for jury duty.

虽然早在1898年，已有妇女在犹他州担任州陪审团，但直到20世纪40年代，大多数州才允许妇女担任陪审员。

6.so that they were unfit to serve on juries.

他们不配担当陪审团。

7.Opponents of capital punishment tend to respond by saying that juries, being human, err.

反对死刑的人常回应说，陪审团是人，就一定会犯错误。

8.Do you have any relatives in juries at the moment?

现在陪审团里有你的亲戚吗？

9.The trial was delayed because the juries 陪审团 could not reach a unanimous decision.

由于<基于某种原因>，陪审团无法达成一致决定，审判被延迟。

10.During the selection process, many potential juries 陪审团 were dismissed for bias.

在选择过程中，许多潜在的陪审团因偏见被驳回。

11.The judge explained the roles of the juries 陪审团 to the courtroom.

法官向法庭解释了陪审团的角色。

12.The juries 陪审团 listened carefully to the testimonies presented by both sides.

陪审团认真倾听了双方提供的证词。

13.After several days of deliberation, the juries 陪审团 finally reached a verdict.

经过几天的讨论，陪审团终于达成了裁决。

作文

The role of juries in the judicial system is crucial for ensuring justice and fairness in legal proceedings. A jury, composed of ordinary citizens, is tasked with evaluating evidence presented during a trial and rendering a verdict based on that evidence. This system is designed to provide a check on the power of judges and to incorporate community standards into the legal process. In many democratic societies, the right to a trial by jury is considered a fundamental aspect of legal rights, reflecting the belief that peers should determine the outcome of serious cases. One of the key functions of juries is to serve as a safeguard against potential government overreach. By having a group of citizens deliberate on the facts of a case, the judicial system helps to ensure that the accused has a fair chance of being judged by their peers rather than solely by a judge who may have biases or preconceived notions. This aspect of the jury system is particularly important in criminal cases, where the stakes are high, and the consequences of a guilty verdict can be severe. However, the jury system is not without its challenges. One significant issue is the selection process of juries. Potential jurors are often screened through a process called 'voir dire,' where attorneys for both sides ask questions to determine any biases or conflicts of interest. This process can be contentious, as both sides seek to assemble a jury that they believe will be sympathetic to their arguments. Additionally, the demographic makeup of juries can sometimes lead to concerns about representation. If a jury is not diverse, it may not fully reflect the community's values or perspectives, potentially impacting the fairness of the trial. Moreover, the deliberation process among juries can be complex. Jurors must weigh evidence, discuss differing opinions, and ultimately reach a consensus. This collaborative effort can be challenging, especially in cases involving complicated legal issues or emotional testimonies. The dynamics within a jury can greatly influence the outcome of a trial, as groupthink or dominant personalities may sway the decision-making process. Despite these challenges, the jury system remains a cornerstone of many legal systems around the world. It embodies the principle that justice should be administered by a group of individuals who represent the community's conscience. The involvement of juries not only adds an element of transparency to the legal process but also fosters public confidence in the judicial system. When citizens participate as jurors, they gain insight into the complexities of legal proceedings and the importance of civic duty. In conclusion, the function of juries in the legal system is multifaceted and vital for upholding justice. While there are challenges associated with the jury process, the benefits of having ordinary citizens involved in legal decisions far outweigh the drawbacks. As society continues to evolve, so too must the jury system, adapting to ensure that it remains a fair and effective means of delivering justice. Ultimately, the presence of juries serves as a reminder of the democratic principles that underpin our legal systems, emphasizing the importance of community participation in the pursuit of justice.

陪审团在司法系统中的角色对于确保法律程序的公正和公平至关重要。陪审团由普通公民组成，负责评估在审判过程中提出的证据，并根据这些证据作出裁决。这个制度旨在对法官的权力进行制衡，并将社区标准融入法律过程。在许多民主社会中，享有陪审团审判的权利被视为法律权利的基本方面，反映了同龄人应决定严重案件结果的信念。 陪审团的一个关键功能是作为防止潜在政府越权的保障。通过让一群公民对案件事实进行讨论，司法系统帮助确保被告有公平的机会，由其同龄人而非可能持有偏见或先入之见的法官来判断。这一陪审团制度的方面在刑事案件中尤为重要，因为其风险很高，判定有罪的后果可能非常严重。 然而，陪审团制度并非没有挑战。一个显著的问题是陪审团的选择过程。潜在陪审员通常通过名为“voir dire”的过程进行筛选，双方律师会询问问题以确定是否存在任何偏见或利益冲突。这个过程可能引发争议，因为双方都希望组建一个他们认为会对其论点持同情态度的陪审团。此外，陪审团的人口构成有时可能导致对代表性的担忧。如果陪审团缺乏多样性，它可能无法充分反映社区的价值观或观点，从而可能影响审判的公正性。 此外，陪审团的审议过程可能很复杂。陪审员必须权衡证据，讨论不同的意见，并最终达成共识。这个合作过程可能具有挑战性，特别是在涉及复杂法律问题或情感证词的案件中。陪审团内部的动态可能极大地影响审判结果，因为群体思维或主导个性可能影响决策过程。 尽管面临这些挑战，陪审团制度仍然是世界许多法律系统的基石。它体现了法律应由一群代表社区良知的个人来施行的原则。陪审团的参与不仅为法律过程增添了透明度，还增强了公众对司法系统的信心。当公民作为陪审员参与时，他们能够深入了解法律程序的复杂性以及公民责任的重要性。 总之，陪审团在法律系统中的功能是多面的，对于维护正义至关重要。虽然陪审团过程存在挑战，但普通公民参与法律决定的好处远超过缺点。随着社会的不断发展，陪审团制度也必须适应，以确保其继续成为公正有效的司法手段。最终，陪审团的存在提醒我们支撑我们法律系统的民主原则，强调了社区参与追求正义的重要性。