|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Just an observer, but reading through the article, it has severe (whether intentional or not) prejudices toward the jury concept. A few examples:
"Most common law jurisdictions (except for much of the United States) have abolished grand juries"
"In many (though not all) U.S. jurisdictions retaining the grand jury. . ."
"Notwithstanding the existence of the right to jury trial, the vast majority of criminal cases in the U.S. are resolved by the plea bargaining process. . ."
These, especially the first two, seem unnecessary to the article's overall purpose.
According to arraignment, this is when the plea is enterred; isn't indictment an earlier process than arraignment? -- Simon J Kissane
I currently have my civics book open and it agrees with you. The order of process that it states is, Preliminary Hearing, Indictment, Arraignment, Trial, Sentancing.Rudraksha 02:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
The pronunciation of this word should be listed somewhere on this article as the word sounds little like how it is spelt.
Yo! The explanation of R v Smith has been given as R versus Smith. In English law the 'v' stands for 'and'. It is in the US (and i am not sure where else) that stands for versus. I had changed this yesterday but it has been chnaged back... Come let us inform people correctly and not change it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs) on 5 July 2007.
- It only stands for "and" in civil cases, I believe 184.108.40.206 (talk) 01:22, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
The abbreviation "v" stands for "versus" ("against") in both English law and U.S. law, in both civil and criminal cases. The "v" does not stand for "and." Famspear (talk) 15:07, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
The correct pronunciation (at least in the UK) is "against" in criminal cases and "and" in civil cases - see the article and the book that I have cited in it. James500 (talk) 20:43, 20 November 2008 (UTC)