Tribunal do júri em face da integridade moral do réu

Abstract

The present study aims to analyze the Institute of the Jury Tribunal in a critical and reflective way, examining intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of this fundamental guarantee related to the defendant's moral integrity.Historically tracing its criminal procedural origins, it is possible to perceive that popular participation attests to the ratification of a legal system with a strong democratic meaning.Considering that it is a judgment resulting from popular sovereignty, the Jury has consolidated itself as an instrument of balance and social order.Its constitutional principles underline the importance of a trial aimed at protecting of fundamental social values.Therefore, it seeks to understand the Jury under the aegis of human rights, more precisely with regard to the defendant's moral and psychological integrity.Being a highly accusatory environment, his daily life is marked by a reproduction game reality. It is a fiction demarcated by contexts of social stratification that are pale and for a legal practice based on the defendant's moral accountability.Such accountability process is externalized in speeches that aim at an argumentative seduction supported by strong social meanings.Symbols concerning a punitive status of humiliation, with a view to externalizing the pattern of social normality, that is, common sense, and to highlight the individual to be judged from the social bosom.Thus, the highlight of the individual is, unfortunately, the legitimization of a false impression that his moral and psychic integrity is at the mercy of the game of argumentative persuasion to be reproduced in plenary.In addition, an inaccessible language is used, both for the juries and for the defendant, in matters related to the procedural steps, with yet another nebulous nuance, with a view to fundamental guarantees, in the ritualistic of the jury.It also addresses the strong weight of the judgment of the defendant's social conduct, that the more inadequate to the established socio-behavioral stereotype, the harder it will be punished.Furthermore, it is explained about how the verdict is strongly influenced by impressions of justice arising from the social imaginary of the Sentencing Council, giving rise to decisions in agreement with stereotypes that have variants, favorable and unfavorable, according to the social position that the defendant occupies.