Having served on a few juries here in the U.S., my experiences tend to confirm
most of Warp's concerns as valid.  The problem with the alternative is that
judges are either directly elected or appointed by elected officials who are
voted into office with even less reasoning and objective scrutiny than one
finds in a jury trial.  Suspicions that those in power are not acting with the
interests of justice as their primary motivating force are often well founded.
Panels of knowledgeable individuals seeking to act genuinely in the interests of
justice would indeed be a vast improvement over the current system, but that's
NOT what would happen were the right to a jury trial to be abolished. The U.S.
is a fragmented society in which religious, ethnic, racial and class bigotry
abound (middle-aged white male of above average income speaking). For all of
its flaws, the jury system is a very necessary check against the unlimited
exploitation of ordinary people by the privileged classes.

Best Regards,
Mike C.

Post a reply to this message