What is the difference between the jury system in Greece and the jury system in England

It can prevent judges from bending the law for personal gain, as well as ills such as ill-consideration.

Since jurors are selected from all walks of life by drawing lots, they can more clearly reflect the concepts of ordinary people in society.

Disadvantages: detached from reality, procrastination and rigidity;

It increases the cost of adjudication, time-consuming, money-consuming and laborious, and increases the burden on taxpayers;

Injustice can easily result from the juror's lack of the necessary knowledge to fully understand the facts of the case, or to understand the judge's instructions, especially if its verdict does not provide reasons.

The jury system refers to a judicial sanction in which a number of jurors are randomly selected from the general public and appointed to participate in criminal or civil proceedings, and the judge makes a determination of facts and determines the application of law independently of the judicial sanctions.

Juries usually consist of between 6 and 12 jurors. The jury will make a judgment on whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty in a criminal case, and a judgment on whether the defendant is liable or the amount of damages in a civil lawsuit.

At present, the jury system is used in common law (also known as common law) countries and regions such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Hong Kong.

In general, the jury system has the following values and significance

For example, many people believe that jury can reflect representative social perspectives in civil cases when determining whether the defendant is liable and the amount of damages, and in criminal cases when jury is applied to legal concepts such as "justifiable defense" or "accomplice or shouting reasonable doubt".

The function of restricting public power or institutions

As mentioned earlier, historically, the jury system has played a role in inhibiting the abuse of public power.

The Federal Supreme Court, in the judgment referred to below, also stated that by granting the defendant the right to be tried by a jury of his or her kind, he is protected from unfair verdicts by improper or overly radical prosecutors, as well as by judges who pander to (prosecutors) or who are out of touch with common sense or biased.

In the United States, the jury system is considered an important institution for democracy. In his book The Politics of Democracy in the United States, the French thinker Alexis de Tocqueville regarded the jury system as an important method of dispersing the people to achieve self-government.

The jury system not only has the effect of popularizing the knowledge of the judicial system among the citizens participating in the process, but also enhances the understanding of the judicial system among the general public through television programs and movies that reflect the subject matter of jury trials.

Improving the efficiency of trials:

As a secondary role of the jury system, it avoids the prolongation of the trial process by focusing on the trial and reaching conclusions in a short period of time.

In the 12th century, Henry II's judicial reform in England introduced a system of selecting local residents as witnesses.

In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, jurors gradually evolved from witnesses in questioning to jurors adjudicating facts, and the system of large and small juries was further established.

The jury system was established to safeguard the feudal royal power, and then gradually developed with the bourgeois revolution and became a powerful force for the bourgeoisie to oppose the search and concealment and oppose the royal power.

The bourgeois revolution in England.

Later, the jury system became an important principle in the litigation system, and it was the right of the parties to be present at the trial by jury.

Hello, it's not easy to answer the question.

If there is any help, thank you.