In addition to an impartial jury, a system should be put in place where juries would be afforded the absolute guarantee to take notes during the trial, to be given written jury instructions, and to cross-examine witnesses in order to ensure a procedurally sound process.

In D. Graham Burnett’s A Trial by Jury, Burnett informs the reader that several of Milcray’s jury members misunderstood the judge's legal instructions, and yet they were not permitted to obtain a hard copy of the same. Additionally, the jury was not permitted to take notes throughout the course of the trial.

Here, the procedure by which the jury was to decide the fate of the accused was significantly flawed. To prohibit those called to jury duty from having an adequate understanding of both the substance of the trial and the decision-making process itself directly burdens the search for truth and justice. And to burden the search is to seriously compromise the fate of the defendant. Stripping a person of their rights through a conviction is no menial task. Such a job must be taken very seriously, and the process that is put into place must be conducive to the seriousness of the situation. Permitting the jury to take notes will allow its members to clearly recall the exact substance of the matter being heard.

In addition to note-taking, there may be times where the attorneys do a poor job during direct and cross-examination. They may not feel the need to ask certain questions, yet those unanswered questions may be essential to the ability of the jury members to conscientiously deliberate with regard to the case. In such an event, the foreman should be permitted to submit questions to the judge, thus allowing the judge to ask any such questions on the jury’s behalf.

Finally, let’s wrap up this editorial up by going over a few key points.