WTF Moment of the week

[kinboshi]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

[Woodsey]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

A 'professional' jury might work. Ie full timers.

[The Camel]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

[Tal]

I'm sure I've quoted before the case of a jury on a murder trial getting a Ouija Board out and convicting because the victim told them to.


I know someone who retired to deliberate on a case and was met with "It's obvious he did it. He's black. They're all at it."


Still the fairest system IMO.

[ripple11]

     
Did The Old Bailey for a couple of weeks.

 Loved every minute!....however it did seem like :

As someone once said, the problem with the jury system is that the decision is made by 12 people who were too stupid to get out of jury service.

[pokerfan]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

In complex finance cases and such, jury members should be plucked from the profession.

[pokerfan]

A lady I know that did Jury service, "I knew he was guilty as soon as he walked in"

True story.

It was the Yorkshire Ripper though

[Tal]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

In complex finance cases and such, jury members should be plucked from the profession.

In those cases, there sometimes isn't a jury.

[pokerfan]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

In complex finance cases and such, jury members should be plucked from the profession.

In those cases, there sometimes isn't a jury.

Ill get my coat.

[kinboshi]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

I definitely wouldn't.  They are there to ensure the jury is directed correctly, and that the defence and prosecution cases are heard correctly and fairly, and then they determine the sentence based on the jury's verdict.

But judges are no better placed to determine guilt or innocence than a lay-person, and sometimes are so out of touch with reality that they'd be dangerous as a judge & jury.

[outragous76]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

I definitely wouldn't.  They are there to ensure the jury is directed correctly, and that the defence and prosecution cases are heard correctly and fairly, and then they determine the sentence based on the jury's verdict.

But judges are no better placed to determine guilt or innocence than a lay-person, and sometimes are so out of touch with reality that they'd be dangerous as a judge & jury.

id take a jury over judge everyday!

Especially if the other side went to public school or had money

[titaniumbean]

why are people so surprised and shocked that the general public are thick as multiple wide shits?

[rfgqqabc]

(The minimum IQ thing was a joke - Note to self, must remember to put a smiley after comments I don't mean to be taken seriously)

I did wonder.  I do try and not take the bait

[The Camel]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

I definitely wouldn't.  They are there to ensure the jury is directed correctly, and that the defence and prosecution cases are heard correctly and fairly, and then they determine the sentence based on the jury's verdict.

But judges are no better placed to determine guilt or innocence than a lay-person, and sometimes are so out of touch with reality that they'd be dangerous as a judge & jury.

You would hope judges knew what "beyond reasonable doubt" meant though.

[kinboshi]

I did jury service, and it was a dull case that really could have been dealt with at a magistrate's court - but anyway, the way individuals within the jury can guide and influence others was interesting and concerning.

Not sure what a better solution would be though?

Judges make the decision?

Hell no.

I'd trust a judge over a jury to make the correct verdict more often than not.

I definitely wouldn't.  They are there to ensure the jury is directed correctly, and that the defence and prosecution cases are heard correctly and fairly, and then they determine the sentence based on the jury's verdict.

But judges are no better placed to determine guilt or innocence than a lay-person, and sometimes are so out of touch with reality that they'd be dangerous as a judge & jury.

You would hope judges knew what "beyond reasonable doubt" meant though.

Yes, and they should explain it so the jury understands it as well.