“We find the defendant not guilty of negligence…” This was the final pronouncement of the jury at a mock trial at a local law school.  As a member of this jury, I was not surprised by the verdict, but was impressed by the process of how we got to that point.  All the testimony, all the diagrams, all the lawyers’ arguments, all the internal jury debate and, in the end, it all came down to the presentation of the evidence and, ultimately, the law itself.  What was the law?  What did it mean?  And how was it applicable to this case?  As jurors, our hearts were with the plaintiff, but the evidence did not bear out a ruling in his favor.

As I contemplated this outcome, I was reminded of the reaction of a recent delegation of lawyers from Georgia to the verdict in a real case in a federal court in Atlanta.  In a case that seemed to them very clear-cut, a surprising “not guilty” verdict had been reached by the jury.  Since the jury process is a new institution in the country of Georgia, the verdict raised even more questions amongst the delegates.  Why was the verdict reached? How did the jury participation enhance or inhibit the full application of the law?  And what processes and procedures were in place to ensure that the final decision was fair? Ultimately, the verdict underscored the importance in the American legal system of the need for a “preponderance of evidence” and a verdict based on arguments and evidence that meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard.

Fortunately, these, and many other related issues were addressed with the delegation as they participated in the Open World Leadership program in Atlanta.  Hosted by the Atlanta-Tbilisi Sister City Commission, the group spent several days observing a live jury trial: witnessing direct and cross examination of witnesses by the attorneys, closing remarks, and the instructions given by the judge to the jury members prior to deliberation.  In addition to their courtroom experiences, the delegates also met individually with federal judges, lawyers from various law firms and the US Attorney.  They also visited the federal penitentiary.  

By the end of their week-long visit, delegates had a better understanding of the American legal system and specifically the jury trial system.  They had a lot of information and ideas about how to establish and work within a jury trial system.

And I have to say, that even though I was only participating in a mock jury trial, I also went home with a new respect for our transparent, well-established jury system, and the many volunteer jurors who make such tough, objective decisions every day.

- Jenny

This delegation was a part of the Open World Leadership program at the Library of Congress.