Would you support professional jurys? (page 2)

mustang

Grand Juries are selected for long terms and are compensated. I was interviewed by a Sherrif when the neighbor across the street applied.

Mustang

Brother Apostate

The biggest part is that we criminalize what are called "victimless crimes". If there are no victims, something should not be a crims. A large part of the problem is the drug war.
BTS

Amen, Brother! The "war on drugs" is a disastrous failure. I'm all for putting drug abuse issues in the hands of employers, not the government. Employers currently have the right to have employees submit to random drug testing. Employers can make whatever rules they wish regarding use or non use of certain substances, and provide penalties (including firing) for breaking the rules. That would eliminate the DEA, 40% of the prison population, as well as a corresponding decrease in attorneys, judges, police, corrections officers, and other related jobs. That is clearly why "they" don't want it- the fox is guarding the hen house.

BA

mustang

i would, as long as there is a way to rotate these people from one jurisdiction to another quite frequently

Gives new meaning to "Change of Venue": move the Jury, not the Trial Real Change of Venue comes along very seldom, but I suppose this could be an option. Mustang

mavie

No, I wouldn't.

M.J.

I wouldn't mind some required classes in high school that would try to prepare our citizens to be better/impartial jurors. I don't see it happening, though.

Not a bad idea. Maybe we can try to get the ball rolling by contacting local lawmakers...it wouldn't hurt to at least start the conversation see what it would take.

Mrs. Fiorini

My understanding is that a defendant can either choose a jury of his/her peers, or have a judge decide the verdict. A judge would certainly offer a more "professional" decision. Most choose juries though. An old saying goes, "If you're guilty choose a jury, if you're innocent choose a judge."

2112

I totally agree on the drug issue, however I would make one stipulation. If someone chose to use drugs and then becomes ill addectid or what ever then it is their problem to deal with not the rest of us. I don't want my tax dollars going to support someone because they mad the wrong choice.

On the judge or jury choice, the jury is useally the best way to go now since there are a lot of ignorant people out there.

Thanks

yknot

That is a scary thought.....

frankiespeakin

As already stated No Way,, We have very incompatant judges too that need to be thrown out,,the US Judicial system sucks big time,,with rediculas laws that send us back into the chrisitan dominated dark ages.

If I ever get on a jury and I don't agree with the law guess what I will do?,, vote not guiltyonly crimes that hurt people and crimes by corporations will I ever vote guilty but not on any flimsy evidence.

mkr32208

The biggest problem with the system now is that intelligent people can get out of jury duty fairly easily. When the lawyers ask "does anyone feel that ____ is less of a crime because it happened to _____" Just raise your hand and say yes, no, maybe, whatever!

You automatically get excluded! Unfortunately this means that juries are (by and large) made up of the bottom percentages of society. Of course the lawyers WANT it that way as those dumbasses are easier to sway...

funny story, last time I got called up for jury duty it was a 6 WEEK trial and I didn't want to sit for it. So the lawyers asked our opinions about the severity of the crime. I raised my hand and said "If you can prove to me that your client killed that drug dealer because he's an addict I'm going to push to free him even if he's guilt, if they can prove to me that he killed that dealer because he is HIMSELF a dealer I'm going to push to convict even if I'm not 100% convinced that he pulled the trigger himself!"

Yeah, I was excused!

Would you support professional jurys?

Share this