U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:09 AM
 
14,253 posts, read 15,339,238 times
Reputation: 13682

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pommysmommy View Post
Based on the surprising comments that have come from some of the jury on the Casey Anthony trial I think the justice system definitely has to move in that direction. It seems clear that this jury didn't grasp the fact that Casey Anthony could be convicted of a lesser charge that did not involve the death penalty.
The judge's instructions were quite clear that she could.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Maryland
18,624 posts, read 16,437,944 times
Reputation: 6348
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
With the explosion of CSI forensics, science, law, understanding of psychology, and statistics of probability, is it time for jurors to be a profession of educated people in those areas? Perhaps the jury could only review the court transcripts, testimony, and evidence without seeing or knowing who the defendant is. This would eliminate any bias, prejudice, or verdicts based on emotion.
In addition, jurors would be better equipped to critically analyze the evidence and take their job seriously.



in the case of OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony, the jury did not do its due diligence by taking the time to methodically go over the evidence and testimony as a group. Impossible to do in 4 or 10 hours respectively considering the amount of testimony and evidence.

The jury system is not working because the jurors often fail to put effort, time, or work into their job/role. In addition, many are simply not educated or intelligent enough to give the information necessary critical analysis.
Arbitrators already perform the function of professional jurors. What they are finding is that the arbitrators overwhelming rule for the banks and corporations. Why? Because they only deal with the average joe once but depend on the banks and corporations for repeat business and if they ruled against banks and corporations they tend to get black balled.

Professional jurors wouldn't work. Although I am for some type of minimal educational level in order to serve on a jury and even vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:10 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,375 posts, read 19,636,273 times
Reputation: 7873
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickenfriedbananas View Post
The real alternative we should be looking at is a panel of judges (3 or 5) who specialize in hearing and weighing evidence. I'd be for it provided that they are not politically influenced. They should carry either long-term appointments or life appointments.

Of course a switch to that sort of system could be more expensive. It might also slow down the trial process considerably.
These judges should then also have college level education in forensics, statistics of probability, psychology, and science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:11 AM
 
Location: Stuck in NE GA right now
4,585 posts, read 10,850,124 times
Reputation: 6616
Hmmm interesting thread, NO I wouldn't want paid professionals as jury...way to many options for corruption.

What many of you fail to realize that many including myself feel its our duty to sit on a jury when called, just like it's our duty to vote as part of being a citizen of this country. Yes some try to get out of jury duty but most do not.

I've been called several times but I'm always dismissed because of my legal background. I'd never try to shirk my jury duty. I'm educated, have traveled around the world and feel I could render a good and just verdict BASED ON THE LAW NOT on "feelings" or what's been tried in the media.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:11 AM
 
17,796 posts, read 19,817,095 times
Reputation: 7450
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaggy001 View Post
That would be the system they have in some European countries.
I like that system much better... of course, the problem arises when we talk about "activist" judges... for instance, those who believe in the death penalty should be the ONLY ones to rule in death penalty cases otherwise we'll see ideology playing in the courts (as we do now) then justice...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:14 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,375 posts, read 19,636,273 times
Reputation: 7873
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReturningWest View Post
Hmmm interesting thread, NO I wouldn't want paid professionals as jury...way to many options for corruption.

What many of you fail to realize that many including myself feel its our duty to sit on a jury when called, just like it's our duty to vote as part of being a citizen of this country. Yes some try to get out of jury duty but most do not.

I've been called several times but I'm always dismissed because of my legal background. I'd never try to shirk my jury duty. I'm educated, have traveled around the world and feel I could render a good and just verdict BASED ON THE LAW NOT on "feelings" or what's been tried in the media.
Interesting that you were not selected to be on a jury because you have a legal background which would help you better understand the law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:15 AM
 
14,253 posts, read 15,339,238 times
Reputation: 13682
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReturningWest View Post
Hmmm interesting thread, NO I wouldn't want paid professionals as jury...way to many options for corruption.

What many of you fail to realize that many including myself feel its our duty to sit on a jury when called, just like it's our duty to vote as part of being a citizen of this country. Yes some try to get out of jury duty but most do not.

I've been called several times but I'm always dismissed because of my legal background. I'd never try to shirk my jury duty. I'm educated, have traveled around the world and feel I could render a good and just verdict BASED ON THE LAW NOT on "feelings" or what's been tried in the media.
Of course, you would be much harder to manipulate. Just as anyone with a CPA would be struck from a case involving financial corruption. Lawyers - prosecution and defense - do not want educated jurors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:15 AM
 
9,881 posts, read 9,043,524 times
Reputation: 2879
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaggy001 View Post
The judge's instructions were quite clear that she could.
One of the jurors indicated that he/she did not convict because the death penalty required proof of the cause of death. Huh? How about negligent homicide?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,375 posts, read 19,636,273 times
Reputation: 7873
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Arbitrators already perform the function of professional jurors. What they are finding is that the arbitrators overwhelming rule for the banks and corporations. Why? Because they only deal with the average joe once but depend on the banks and corporations for repeat business and if they ruled against banks and corporations they tend to get black balled.

Professional jurors wouldn't work. Although I am for some type of minimal educational level in order to serve on a jury and even vote.
Same could be said for a typical citizen.

BTW, what is the curriculum of college that these "arbitrators" have? And is their case load kept confidential?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-09-2011, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,375 posts, read 19,636,273 times
Reputation: 7873
The science of forensics is exploding. We need jurors educated in such so that they can fully understand and appreciate the significance of it.

One example: When a juror for the OJ case was asked about the DNA found, she answered, "So what, everyone has DNA?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:42 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top