|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
Unless you are debarred from sitting on a jury, you can full fill this role irrespective of your beliefs, however extreme they might be. The belief being that as a group, moderation will prevail. But these people will have little or no legal experience.
On the other hand, some countries have trial by Judge (South Africa) so the decision is going to be more technical and some might argue, more well informed. But it will be decided by one, two, or three people.
Which is best?........... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Unless you are debarred from sitting on a jury, you can full fill this role irrespective of your beliefs, however extreme they might be. The belief being that as a group, moderation will prevail. But these people will have little or no legal experience.
On the other hand, some countries have trial by Judge (South Africa) so the decision is going to be more technical and some might argue, more well informed. But it will be decided by one, two, or three people.
Which is best?..........."
Both have there merits but we pretty much invented the idea of modern justice and it has worked up to a point, but Shakespeare had it right with his kill all the lawyers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
what am I being charged with?
Sounds daft but if it means like life in prison then I want more people deciding my fate.
If it is like a fine or minor prison time, then I'd rather not waste a whole bunch of peoples time, so a judge, or even 2 or 3 judges |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
For minor crime a judging panel, for murder etc a jury of peers but for complex financial crime etc there should be experts as a jury panel might not have the skills and concentration for a very long technical trial |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together "
Mondays one was very interesting viewing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together
Mondays one was very interesting viewing "
I need to Iplayer that one as I didn't get to watch it all |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together
Mondays one was very interesting viewing
I need to Iplayer that one as I didn't get to watch it all"
Watch it....interesting viewing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Solicitors used to be barred from serving on a jury. The reasoning was that they knew too much about the legal process. They are now allowed to serve. Go figure. There are issues with both trial by jury and trial by judge. No system is perfect. In either case, it is trial by human. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
We have both systems...
In magistrates courts you can be tried by a bench of JP's or by a Stipendiary Magistrate or Recorder who is a junior judge. We also have trial by judge only in cases where it is felt necessary to avoid jury tampering, in the 70's we famously used this system in the 'Diplock' terrorist courts in NI. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic