In American trial courts, the judge or "court" is understood as the source of the law and the jurors as the triers of fact for the case before them. Jurors in federal court, for example, are instructed that their duty is "to decide the facts in accordance with the principle of law laid down by the judge's charge to the jury" [Handbook for Trial Jurors Serving in the United States District Courts]. In the words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Harlan over a century ago, "In this separation of court and jury is found the chief values, as well as safety, of the jury system. Those functions [of the court to expound the law and of the jury to apply the law] cannot be confounded or disregarded without endangering the stability of public justice, as well as the security of private and personal rights" [Sparf v. United States, 156 U.S. 51, 106, (1895)].

This section of "The American Jury" offers an introduction to some of the complexities relating to jurors in their roles as triers of fact. In addition to defining the jurors' role, these resources focus on how juries assess evidence and make decisions, as well as some of the rules governing the role that judges play in determining which facts can be heard by juries. [For the view that jurors are deciders of law as well as fact, see Jury Nullification.]

LIST OF LESSONS

Sam Sheppard Murder Trials:
A Unit on the American Jury

• Overview, Objectives, Learning Standards, Instructions, and Assessment
  
  
• Lesson 1: Pre-Trial Investigation
  
  
• Photo: Sam and Marilyn Sheppard
  
  
• Lesson 2: State of Ohio v. Sam Sheppard (1954)
  
  
• Lesson 3: The Verdict & New Evidence
  
  
• Lesson 4: State of Ohio v. Sam Sheppard (1966)
  
  
• Sheppard Murder Case Timeline

LINKS TO RELEVANT SITES

Sparf v. U.S., 156 U.S. 51 (1895) (juries are triers of fact and not determiners of law)

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (trial court judge is the "gatekeeper" of expert scientific testimony)

Kumho Tire Co., Ltd., et al. V. Carmichael et al. (1999) ("gatekeeping" function of the trial court judge pertains to all expert testimony)

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 000 U.S. 99-478 (2000) (any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum, other than the fact of a prior conviction, must be submitted to a jury)

PRINT RESOURCES

Allen, Ronald J. "Unexplored Aspects of the Theory of the Right to Trial by Jury," 66 Washington Law Quarterly (1988), 33-45.

______________. "Evidence and Information," International Conference on Law, Technology and Information (Tel Aviv, 1999), pp. 1-24.

Constitutional Rights Foundation. "DNA, Lie Detector, and Voice Evidence," Bill of Rights in Action, Volume 13, Number 3 (Summer 1997), pp. 5-8.

_____________________________. "How Reliable Are Eyewitnesses?" Bill of Rights in Action, Volume 13, Number 3 (Summer 1997), pp. 9-11.

Katz, Stanley Nider, (Ed.). "Introduction," pp. 1-33, in James Alexander, A Brief Narrative of the Case and Trial of John Peter Zenger Printer of the New York Weekly Journal (1972).

Rice, Paul R. "Scientifically Speaking," Legal Times, October 17, 2000.