data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d48c1/d48c1c3eb4bc88409ad71962bb45ebf41bb9e190" alt=""
Friday, April 21, 2006
Study on Juries Highlights Flaws in Peremptory Challenges
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d48c1/d48c1c3eb4bc88409ad71962bb45ebf41bb9e190" alt=""
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Justice is a fickle thing, one law for the common man, another for the king. And don't you know when kings can't win the game, it won't be long 'til all the rules are changed. And it's all justified, when you're on the winning side. (The Winning Side, Robbie O'Connell)
3 comments:
I have a friend who served time and we have often had discussions of the problems with the current American criminal justice system. We have discussed the dumbing down of jurors and emotional and intellectual manipulation of same. How might criminal justice be improved?
David in Grand Coteau
Just saw your note.
I tried one murder case years ago. Improving the system is tough. Three things have shocked me as trial lawyer: First, there is no presumption of innocence. Most jurors feel, if you don’t testify, you’re guilty. Second, if the police arrest you, you’re guilty. Third, no one seems shocked by the people who were executed only to have DNA evidence that later shows they were innocent. That’s scary.
I’ve tried a lot of civil jury cases and I never try to pick a dumb jury; although, I know lawyers who like such a jury composition.
We're conditioned by crime dramas on TV.
One idea is professional jurors, but I don't know if that would be better or worse. I'm wary of unintended consequences. We already have professional judges who have power to set aside a verdict. They too seldom exercise the prerogative.
Post a Comment