¿Si la colaboración del jurado y gran jurado en el sistema penal acusatorio en Estados Unidos resulta efectiva, es viable implementarla en el sistema penal acusatorio Colombiano?

Abstract

One of the main features of the American Criminal Justice System is the use of juries, who are citizens older than 18, cited randomly, in order to establish guilt or non-guilt of the suspect. The procedure of selection of the jury that will appear during the trial is complex, as the Prosecutor, advocate and judge must conduct a series of interrogatories to exclude people who do not meet the required profile for each case. After the jury is chosen, this refers to a President representing the Group and it will perform the role of moderator, judge joins the Group and imparts instructions in fact and law. The minimum of members of a jury are 6 and the maximum is 24, this depends on the laws of each State, each State has also established if it requires unanimity in the verdict or not. Nowadays, there are not many cases that are brought to trial with jurors, because even though the system is effective, it is slow, expensive and flush the system, so the Attorney prefers the defendant to perform a negotiation known as the plea bargaining, where benefits are given as indictment for misdemeanor, reduction in sentence, in Exchange for confessions. The application of the figure of juries in Colombia was known as jurors of conscience in 1,821 was enshrined in the Constitution of Cúcuta, then in 1851 it was determined that in the crimes of homicide, theft of greater amount and theft, the researched would be judged by their peers. Then expanded the trial by jury for all crimes, except for those committed by public officials, continued with its evolution to apply different codes of criminal procedure, but in the end with the Constitution of 1991 this figure, was abolished because it expressly contemplates limits having individuals in the participation of the administration of Justice