This question requires you to list the arguments in favor of keeping the jury system for both kinds of cases. Then, you must discuss the validity of those arguments. That is, you must talk about the good points and the bad points of each argument. So, you are only talking about the arguments in favor of retaining the jury system. However, you are talking about both the good and the bad points of those arguments.
For example, one argument in favor of keeping the jury system is that juries allow the common people to have a part in the legal system. This prevents the government from taking away our rights. So, now you need to give points in support of and against this argument. You might say that this argument makes a lot of sense in criminal trials. In such trials, the jury can examine the government’s evidence and prevent it from convicting people without proof. That is an argument in favor. Then you can argue against this. You can say that the government is not part of a civil trial. Therefore, keeping the jury system does not prevent the government from oppressing anyone. If you do this, you will have analyzed one argument for keeping the jury system.
Thank you for our answer, I did email you but i had no response. I am First year Law student and this Q is for an examination. My answer plan is:
1) How jury system was before
2)How it's in nowdays
3)The courts that they jury is used
4)Criminal action (what it is and what juries do in the criminal cases)
6) Civil action (what it is and what juries do in the civil cases)
7) Advantages of the Jury system (argument)
8) case exampes (for favor)
9) probably quotes
What do you think ?