I watched yesterday as John Edwards basically walked out a free man. What repulsed me is the reason why. I have served on several juries..the last being a case against an illegal alien. He was clearly guilty…as ten of us recognized…the evidence was there. The other two jurors had run ins the police and I believe they this was a way of getting back at them. We fought and argued…at one point I got scared. The point of being on a jury is to examine the evidence…which we did. We were hung. We sent a letter to the judge an din this case…it was over. But in the Edwards case the judge gave them a tongue lashing of sorts and sent them back in the room. They obviously had a difference of opinion. But the weekend was coming up…people had engagements to go to…and they quickly came back with a verdict. Obviously people forgot whatever evidence made them stand on the truth the way they saw it. So they caved in to get it over with. How is this fair…to believe someone is guilty or innocent…and then be told by the judge….to agree with the majority even if you think opposite of what the group thinks…just to get the (*)(*)(*)(*) trial over? Fair….whats fair and was justice served in this case?
Juries don't always reach the right decision or even a just decision but within the parameters of what they're allowed to do I think they're the best system. They certainly beat the alternative of a lynch mob. I think we need to be much more aggressive in dealing with corrupt attorneys and judges.
Jury trials are usally the most "just" way of determining guilt, but a few changes to the rules would make the process much more fair and expedient. First, have 11 or 13, but not twelve jurors. Always let majority vote determine guilt. There could never be a hung jury. Another reform would be to select the very best "jury of their peers." This would not include the most ignorant, and often the most racially biased group that statistically votes one way or the other. This would be the people who have the most intelligence and wisdom; any adult who scores the highest on randomized tests on logic and interpreting human behavior---ie, knowing when someone is lying.
