John VanSickle <evi### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> More to the point, our courts have the tendency to see the jury as 
> twelve ignorant bumpkins who need to be led to the proper conclusion by 
> the ever-more-wise-and-knowledgeable judge.  Which leads to a situation 
> opposite of that of the aforementioned theory:  The judge ruling that 
> certain categories of evidence and testimony may not be presented in court.

  Well, a judge sometimes *does* have a better understanding of what is
legally admissible and relevant and what isn't, compared to 12 laymen,
most of who have got their knowledge of the judicial system from TV shows.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message