• MangoCats@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    the judges would actually follow the law (juries wouldn’t be able to exist for most cases)

    A core tenet of the law is the right to trial by a jury of your peers.

    Jury trials have a very similar flaw to democracy.

    Think of an average person you know, how stupid are they? Now, realize that half the people out there are stupider than that.

    An average randomly selected jury is going to be composed of 50% below average intelligence people.

    • Vinstaal0@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Of the US law yes, but that’s not the case everywhere.

      I personally don’t think juries should do more than give extra input to the judge. The judge should follow the law exactly and tif they don’t, the average person should be able to file a complaint about them not doing their job and they should be investigated.

      (I also work in a field (accountancy) where you can file complaints to be for very cheap if I don’t do my job correctly)