|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted April 23, 2013 07:40 PM |
|
|
The Jury System
What are your thoughts on the jury system? Do you think it's better than a judge or a group of judges deciding the verdict or do you think it's populism? If it's the system in your country, are you pleased with it, if it's not, would you like it to be? If you were chosen to be a juror, would you do it? Do you think being chosen for jury "duty" should be mandatory or optional?
When I think about it I see some ups and downs:
1- It is harder to corrupt or bribe 12 (or X) randomly picked people. Yet, if you can get around the system and you are powerful enough (like a mob boss for instance), they are also more vulnerable and they have no carrier or image to ruin because of the decision they make.
2- Again, it is harder for 12 (or X) randomly picked people to be prejudiced against a defendant than a single judge but then I remember the line from the movie Amistad. When explaining the ways of the court, the experienced lawyer John Adams Jr.(played by Anthony Hopkins) says:
- The one with the best story always wins.
This, of course has nothing to do with justice and it's more about how presentable and likable the "storytellers" are. So would a group of professional law men would be more analytical in their decisions? Are the jurors (randomly picked people) qualified enough to base their decisions only on the case presented or will bias (positive or negative) will always have a role in their verdict?
One might say there are insurances for them to behave accordingly like pre-interviews before the actual trial and the debate process among the jurors themselves. Are they enough?
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 08:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
What are your thoughts on the jury system?
Quote:
1- It is harder to corrupt or bribe 12 (or X) randomly picked people. Yet, if you can get around the system and you are powerful enough (like a mob boss for instance), they are also more vulnerable and they have no carrier or image to ruin because of the decision they make.
There are many cases in Bulgaria,which show our justice system not working.I don't want to get offtopic,so my comments on the jury follow.
Evidence and witness are key components in a process,so even the best incorruptable jury could have problems with finding enough of these two elements.(in the case of the mob boss there might be none of the two-reference-The Godfather)
The lawyers also have the power to convince the members of the jury in their point of view regarding the opposite side in the process.
Of course in the most cases the members of the jury will be very busy in professional and personal plan,with inability to take their time in finding the truth.
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 08:22 PM |
|
|
Altering the evidence or intimidating the witnesses can be done both in a court with jury or a judge (as verdict giver). So there's not much to discuss in there specific to the jury system.
We're gonna have courts, that's a given, are courts better with juries or judges?
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 08:36 PM |
|
|
I'm okay with juries as long as there's a balance of powers between the judge and the jury. The main purpose the jury is to have a public presence in the conviction process. Obviously it's stupid to assume appointed judges are unalterably impartial. I've never heard a good case for why juries should never exist at all, except perhaps for the potential pain in the ass it is for the jury members.
There's a screening process as far as juries go. If everyday working, professional people aren't qualified to sit on on a jury, I'm not sure who is. 99% of the time, it's not really rocket science.
But to be honest I don't know much or really care much about the fine details of law. Boring subject. That's my layman's opinion that's grounded around what I read in a random gen ed textbook.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 08:46 PM |
|
|
I think trial by jury of your peers is an absolute must in a democracy. (Not that I like democracies)
Juries that are in anyway intimidated by the media or public pressure are often grounds for appeal, so not much harm other than burning more tax-payers money is done via that route.
Juries tend to work outside of the bounds of the law, the judges merely 'advise', one case where a man pleaded guilty for releasing classified data relating to the sinking of the ARA General Belgrano was acquitted on unknown grounds, cause you know, juries do what they want, despite the fact that the judge made it very clear that an offense has been committed.
At the same time we had had a case where the jury thought that it was intelligent to consult a ouija board in order to determine whether the defendant was guilty or not.
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 09:51 PM |
|
|
The jury should determine guilt and punishment. The judge is there to keep the lawyers in line and make sure legal protocols are followed. The jury is free to reject the law as being unfair and refuse to convict someone for breaking a law they deep to be unfair.
____________
Revelation
|
|
OmegaDestroyer
Hero of Order
Fox or Chicken?
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 09:56 PM |
|
|
|
The jury is not there to determine whether or not a law is fair. The jury's sole function is to determine whether or not there is sufficient evidence to reach the appropriate threshold.
|
|
Tsar-Ivor
Promising
Legendary Hero
Scourge of God
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 10:06 PM |
|
|
"beyond reasonable doubt"
Id est the jury must be 100% certain that the defendant is guilty. (only for criminal law I believe, Civil law is 50%)
____________
"No laughs were had. There is only shame and sadness." Jenny
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 10:23 PM |
|
|
Quote:
The jury should determine guilt and punishment. The judge is there to keep the lawyers in line and make sure legal protocols are followed. The jury is free to reject the law as being unfair and refuse to convict someone for breaking a law they deep to be unfair.
So the person isn't actually a judge then. They're more like a referee.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted April 23, 2013 11:42 PM |
|
|
All civil cases should be decided by judge, according to law, just useless burden on jurors.
The american big juries are perhaps too much. Granted, we're all biased against it due to ridiculous US court dramas/movies.
It's a panel of three judges here, with two layman judges appointed alongside a real one to decide. The defendant can also call for an all judge jury if he so wishes. I think this is a good way.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 10:50 AM |
|
|
What I find controversial is that the people that have a part in the sentence are often not qualified to pass such a sentence and are biased in one way or another.
I prefer the system where there is no jury. A non-biased Judge should be enough. Of course, the problem here is the imperfection of man himself - but I'd still pick that over Jury+Judge system, at least until we can implement Artificial Intelligence developed enough to act as a Judge.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 11:14 AM |
|
|
|
In Bulgaria we have a judicial system corrupted to pretty much the last judge. Known criminals avoid sentences in 80-90% of the time, suing a politician is just as out of the question as it was before the fall of the socialist regime, generally trying to hold any "big shot" responsible for anything is nearly impossible. Jury or no jury, the law is applicable only if somebody wants to apply it.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 12:53 PM |
|
|
If we try to apply practice to our reasoning, we'd have to ban courts in post-Soviet countries - too much corruption.
Hence I speak of theory only.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 02:13 PM |
|
|
|
Wow, so it is as bad as they say it is ha... I always thought the news on post-Soviet countries' corruption level had to be a little exaggerated.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 02:17 PM |
|
|
It is and it isn't at the same time.
It's not "Wild West" as we like to picture it, but at the same time, things that would make Americans, Germans, etc. facepalm are perfectly normal here.
For example, in Soviet Poorland, a year ago, a group of bosses of a gang that has been stealing cars for almost 10 years has been declared innocent in court. That's right, people OFFICIALLY labelled as "crime lords" are innocent.
k.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 04:44 PM |
|
|
Quote:
For example, in Soviet Poorland, a year ago, a group of bosses of a gang that has been stealing cars for almost 10 years has been declared innocent in court. That's right, people OFFICIALLY labelled as "crime lords" are innocent.
Which they might actually be. Labels mean nothing.
I can understand your frustartion but without extensive knowledge of the case, I can not agree with your position.
What did you charge them for anyway, being labeled crime lords? 
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 04:55 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 16:55, 24 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
For example, in Soviet Poorland, a year ago, a group of bosses of a gang that has been stealing cars for almost 10 years has been declared innocent in court. That's right, people OFFICIALLY labelled as "crime lords" are innocent.
Wrong example I think. Crime lords get away with that kind of stuff everywhere. That's why they are called the lords of crime. Because they are organized, have the backbone to by-pass law and not your every day car thief. John Gotti, head of mafia in US, got away with murder and other major crimes many times, in fact so many times he started to brag about it. That's when they really took him down. Remember it was long before post-Soviet countries when Balzac wrote:
- Laws are like spider webs, small flies get caught but the bigger ones fly ripping it through.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 07:14 PM |
|
|
Okay, wrong word. They are not crime lords. They are baldheaded nobodies in tracksuits that think of themselves as "Mafia".
And such zero-es still get court invincibility.
Quote:
I can understand your frustartion but without extensive knowledge of the case, I can not agree with your position.
What did you charge them for anyway, being labeled crime lords?
I lived in the same city as them. It wasn't even "common knowledge" - everybody knew what Pruszkow gang is and who leads them. Many of the people I played football with as a kid ended up as grunts of that gang.
Trust me on this one. They are guilty of leading a crime gang - is that not enough to put them in jail? apparently not according to our "honest" judges.
heck, one of them even became a crown witness against the others! And it did absolutely ****.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 07:42 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Which they might actually be. Labels mean nothing.
I can understand your frustartion but without extensive knowledge of the case, I can not agree with your position.
What did you charge them for anyway, being labeled crime lords?
If you live in a country where the judicial system actually does something, you simply won't understand. Simply put, it's like this - if you are a small-time criminal with no connections, maybe even one who breaks the law to feed himself or his family, you're screwed. 100% law enforcement. If however you have an influential boss or you are that boss, you're nearly immune. They have to catch you red-handed with two dozens of witnesses to have a chance to indict you successfully in the court. These really big criminals have links to several political parties, i.e. the parties which will either form a government or will have a substantial representation in the National Assembly. Our former prime minister figures in official foreign intelligence reports as guy related to the organized crime. There's no law worth mentioning under such circumstances.
A more romantic way to describe is through a nice anecdote which became popular during the last 20 years: "Each state has its mafia. In Bulgaria, the mafia has a state."
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted April 24, 2013 08:16 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Okay, wrong word. They are not crime lords. They are baldheaded nobodies in tracksuits that think of themselves as "Mafia".
And such zero-es still get court invincibility.
I lived in the same city as them. It wasn't even "common knowledge" - everybody knew what Pruszkow gang is and who leads them. Many of the people I played football with as a kid ended up as grunts of that gang.
Trust me on this one. They are guilty of leading a crime gang - is that not enough to put them in jail? apparently not according to our "honest" judges.
heck, one of them even became a crown witness against the others! And it did absolutely ****.
Ah yes, that one. I think it was rather famous failure of the prosecution. Inconclusive evidence or something like that. Wasn't there more than one witness?
The problem with charging someone with leading a criminal organisation is that proving it is ridiculously hard. Running an organisation that does have criminal in it is not enough. You need direct evidence that they ordered someone to be shot or something along those lines. Why did you think they arrested Al Capone on tax evasion. 
Common knowledge does not hold in court.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
|
|
