a problem with the jury system is that most people lack critical reasoning skills
- Thread starter aidanjm
- Start date
Sheik Yerbouti
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2005
- 14,080
- 5,453
- 136
that's not their job, their job is to listen to the evidence and weight it. I'd rather have 12 people decide my fate rather than a single person who could be a bastard or just having a bad day. They weren't called hanging judges because they starred in porn movies.
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
Critical reasoning?
Like this?
God is Love
Love is Blind
Therefore Ray Charles is God.
Yep, that about sums up the average persons thinking.
Seriously, trials have become very complicated. The technological evidence is beyond most people. Any time a ballistics report is admitted to evidence the defense has three people who will spout long words that purport to show why the evidence is false.
And when you get into financial cases like accounting fraud, well, most people are just not educated enough, nor intelligent enough, to really make a reasoned decision.
Medical malpractice cases? Asking laypeople to make decision on these is really making them fish out of water.
So it is not really that the average Joe or Jane is a moron (though some are). It's the complexity of our world that has made court cases technological hurdles most people can't overcome.
Like this?
God is Love
Love is Blind
Therefore Ray Charles is God.
Yep, that about sums up the average persons thinking.
Seriously, trials have become very complicated. The technological evidence is beyond most people. Any time a ballistics report is admitted to evidence the defense has three people who will spout long words that purport to show why the evidence is false.
And when you get into financial cases like accounting fraud, well, most people are just not educated enough, nor intelligent enough, to really make a reasoned decision.
Medical malpractice cases? Asking laypeople to make decision on these is really making them fish out of water.
So it is not really that the average Joe or Jane is a moron (though some are). It's the complexity of our world that has made court cases technological hurdles most people can't overcome.
zephyrprime
Diamond Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 7,512
- 2
- 81
I used to work in retail and let me tell you, a lot of old people are dumb. And it's not just concerning modern technology either. I believe it's not their fault and it's largely due to a brain in slow decline. They probably don't have any sort of specific disease and it's really quite sad to see and you can't help but think "this could be me some day". They're not truly disabled yet but they don't have all their marbles anymore. However, not all old people are like this but a lot of them are.
Your question is a subset of the universal question as to where one can find objective truth. We know that people who have an interest in an outcome are biased in favor of that outcome in the general run of cases. A jury is an attempt to find a statistically large enough sample of people who have no direct interest in outcome to render an interest unbiased outcome. The hope is that most people have sufficient seriousness, intelligence, and sincerity to do what is right if their own ego is not directly involved. At the present time and at our current state of evolution in all areas of potential human development, it may not be perfect but it looks to me like the best we can do.
Personally I think juries on average work very hard to do the right thing. They are also selected by both the prosecution and the defense.
Personally I think juries on average work very hard to do the right thing. They are also selected by both the prosecution and the defense.
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
In Texas the trial for the woman who cut off her babies arms ended in a 'Mistrial'
One jurist decided that she was guilty at the very begining, and refused to consider any of the 'Insanity' plea merits.
holdout told panel he wouldn't consider insanity for Schlosser
<Dallas News>
The one person who voted guilty in the Dena Schlosser capital murder case told other panelists he would never consider her insanity defense in the death of her 10-month-old daughter, three jurors said.
Ms. Schlosser's trial ended in a mistrial Saturday because jurors could not reach a unanimous decision after more than 40 hours of deliberations over four days. Ten panelists voted for not guilty by reason of insanity, one voted guilty and another could not make up her mind.
Three jurors described a journey that went from polite conversation at times to yelling and crying. At one point, the court gathered jurors' cellphones after complaints that the holdout wrote text messages during deliberations. At the outset, jurors were split 6-5-1 in favor of insanity before settling into the final split on the second day of deliberations.
To try to break their stalemate, jurors drew on easels and a whiteboard equations, graphs and charts documenting Ms. Schlosser's mental illness. They even came up with a theory comparing mental illness to the trajectory of a cannon ball.
"He told us from the beginning, he ... walked into the courtroom and his mind was already made," said juror Hani Jacob, 57. "He made an oath, but he wasn't really serious about it."
Legal experts say that if the holdout was asking questions, then he was participating in the process. Panelists said the 51-year-old juror asked them question after question during deliberations.
The holdout juror did not return phone calls seeking comment and did not answer the door at his Plano home Monday afternoon, though he had just gone inside. Fellow jurors and a neighbor could not provide definitive personal information about him or his occupation.
Panelist Debbie Keen, 30, said the holdout juror questioned whether Ms. Schlosser's serious shoulder wound was inflicted by police. She said he also questioned whether her church told Ms. Schlosser to kill daughter Maggie and she did even though she knew it was wrong.
Despite other panelists telling him ? and sometimes yelling ? that there was no evidence to support those scenarios, the holdout stuck to his position, jurors said. One juror's sarcastic response was to ask whether he thought aliens made her do it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
So because of the ignorance and stupidity of this bonehead - we get to start it all over, after tainting the potential jury pool.
One jurist decided that she was guilty at the very begining, and refused to consider any of the 'Insanity' plea merits.
holdout told panel he wouldn't consider insanity for Schlosser
<Dallas News>
The one person who voted guilty in the Dena Schlosser capital murder case told other panelists he would never consider her insanity defense in the death of her 10-month-old daughter, three jurors said.
Ms. Schlosser's trial ended in a mistrial Saturday because jurors could not reach a unanimous decision after more than 40 hours of deliberations over four days. Ten panelists voted for not guilty by reason of insanity, one voted guilty and another could not make up her mind.
Three jurors described a journey that went from polite conversation at times to yelling and crying. At one point, the court gathered jurors' cellphones after complaints that the holdout wrote text messages during deliberations. At the outset, jurors were split 6-5-1 in favor of insanity before settling into the final split on the second day of deliberations.
To try to break their stalemate, jurors drew on easels and a whiteboard equations, graphs and charts documenting Ms. Schlosser's mental illness. They even came up with a theory comparing mental illness to the trajectory of a cannon ball.
"He told us from the beginning, he ... walked into the courtroom and his mind was already made," said juror Hani Jacob, 57. "He made an oath, but he wasn't really serious about it."
Legal experts say that if the holdout was asking questions, then he was participating in the process. Panelists said the 51-year-old juror asked them question after question during deliberations.
The holdout juror did not return phone calls seeking comment and did not answer the door at his Plano home Monday afternoon, though he had just gone inside. Fellow jurors and a neighbor could not provide definitive personal information about him or his occupation.
Panelist Debbie Keen, 30, said the holdout juror questioned whether Ms. Schlosser's serious shoulder wound was inflicted by police. She said he also questioned whether her church told Ms. Schlosser to kill daughter Maggie and she did even though she knew it was wrong.
Despite other panelists telling him ? and sometimes yelling ? that there was no evidence to support those scenarios, the holdout stuck to his position, jurors said. One juror's sarcastic response was to ask whether he thought aliens made her do it.
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
So because of the ignorance and stupidity of this bonehead - we get to start it all over, after tainting the potential jury pool.
ebaycj
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2002
- 5,418
- 0
- 0
Here's the thing, you only need 1 smart person on the jury.
In deliberations, he/she will (hopefully) explain to the rest of the jury in simple terms what all the technological shite means. If people are dumb enough to be swayed by expert witnesses spouting large scientific words, they are also probably dumb enough to be swayed by the-smartest-guy-in-the-room's dumbed-down explanation of the expert witness's testimony.
The only problem with this, is that the dumb people have to be smart enough to recognize that the-smartest-guy-in-the-room really is the smartest guy in the room, while at the same time they have to be humble enough to admit that they need a dumbed-down explanation because they really have no clue what any of the expert testimony meant.
In deliberations, he/she will (hopefully) explain to the rest of the jury in simple terms what all the technological shite means. If people are dumb enough to be swayed by expert witnesses spouting large scientific words, they are also probably dumb enough to be swayed by the-smartest-guy-in-the-room's dumbed-down explanation of the expert witness's testimony.
The only problem with this, is that the dumb people have to be smart enough to recognize that the-smartest-guy-in-the-room really is the smartest guy in the room, while at the same time they have to be humble enough to admit that they need a dumbed-down explanation because they really have no clue what any of the expert testimony meant.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
I served on a jury last fall that convicted the accused of murder. During the trial I had to discipline myself to not let my personal biases interfere with the critical analysis of the evidence presented.
I'm certain that many jurors just go with their emotional reactions.
I'm certain that many jurors just go with their emotional reactions.
Exactly right. I don't think for a minute these cases are too "complicated". It seems to me that too many people have just lost touch with their common sense or are unwilling to think thoings out properly. Let's not over react and change the system.
Some comedian once quipped about how being a criminal defendant must be tough, having your fate decided by 12 people not smart enough to get out of jury duty.
I've been registered to vote for approaching 20 years, and I really want to get called for jury duty, just to see what it's like, and I've never gotten the call . . . shucks!
I've been registered to vote for approaching 20 years, and I really want to get called for jury duty, just to see what it's like, and I've never gotten the call . . . shucks!
Originally posted by: Dissipate
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Weird that I'm not old and retired and I get to do jury duty this month
That's what happens when you register to vote.
In my state you can get called to jury duty if you get a drivers license, register a vehicle. etc.
Anything that puts your name in the county system.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Originally posted by: Dissipate
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Weird that I'm not old and retired and I get to do jury duty this month
That's what happens when you register to vote.
In my state you can get called to jury duty if you get a drivers license, register a vehicle. etc.
Anything that puts your name in the county system.
Ha... We have an absolutely fool-proof system here... We pull our jury duty rolls from the list of PFD applicants. If we pulled from the list of registered voters we'd never be able to form a jury. (We have more registered voters than we have people)
techs
Lifer
- Sep 26, 2000
- 28,559
- 4
- 0
I would think more people would try to get their names on the PFD illegaly than the voting lists.Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Originally posted by: Dissipate
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Weird that I'm not old and retired and I get to do jury duty this month
That's what happens when you register to vote.
In my state you can get called to jury duty if you get a drivers license, register a vehicle. etc.
Anything that puts your name in the county system.
Ha... We have an absolutely fool-proof system here... We pull our jury duty rolls from the list of PFD applicants. If we pulled from the list of registered voters we'd never be able to form a jury. (We have more registered voters than we have people)
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Originally posted by: techs
I would think more people would try to get their names on the PFD illegaly than the voting lists.Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Originally posted by: Dissipate
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Weird that I'm not old and retired and I get to do jury duty this month
That's what happens when you register to vote.
In my state you can get called to jury duty if you get a drivers license, register a vehicle. etc.
Anything that puts your name in the county system.
Ha... We have an absolutely fool-proof system here... We pull our jury duty rolls from the list of PFD applicants. If we pulled from the list of registered voters we'd never be able to form a jury. (We have more registered voters than we have people)
LOL... It's not that they are on there illegally. The state just never purges its voter rolls. We have a huge transient military population. The gete transferred up here for a few years then get transfered out. While they are here they register to vote. Same thing applies tothe population at large. We have a lot of turnover up here. Over 40-50 years it adds up.
Anyway... nobody ever audits the voter registration rolls to see if those people are still alive or in the state. They passed legislation last year to clean things up but I have no idea what progress has been made beyond that.
As for gaming the PFD system... That's a little tougher. You have to have two people sign off on your app, under threat of perjury and loss of all future PFD checks, that you are eligible for the check. I'm not saying it doesn't happen... but the state does a pretty good job of auditing the system, including, randomly verifying all info on a specific percentage of applications.
Kind of sad really when you think about it... The state seems to be more worried about preventing a few tens of thousands of dollars of fraud in a $600 million payout than they are about who is voting.
Uh, actually, if the evidence presented is of a scientific nature, they'd be required to way that as well. How useful is a juror who doesn't even know what DNA is?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter