12
Why do Western countries have jury duty? (multiverse.soulism.net)
submitted 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

All nations within the Anglosphere (US, UK, CA, AU & NZ) have JD imposed towards citizens. I know that the US & Canada both inherited that from Britain, which explains why they have it. However, should it be entirely only the judge making the conviction (some countries operate on a lay-judge system meaning juries aren't used, such as Finland or Japan for example) rather than leaving that decision up to jurors?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 10 points 10 hours ago (12 children)

I personally think it's better to have 12 people deliberating over the evidence etc and formulating reasons for their conviction than one

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 6 hours ago (3 children)

    I'd rather have a professional judge me than some randos who just want to get home quick (but also, some countries have three judges and I think it's possibly the best way to deal with the problem)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 hours ago (1 child)

    Doesn't a judge have to agree on the decision of the jury anyway? Like if there is no doubt of a crime and the jury comes back with a not guilty the judge can tell the jury to go back and discussed it again or dismiss the jury and start again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 hours ago

    In the US, no. Not a lawyer, so please correct me if I'm wrong. In criminal cases, if the jury can't come to a unanimous decision, then the judge can send them back to deliberate further or declare a hung jury and the prosecution can decide if they want to try again. If the jury comes back with a unanimous verdict then it stands. If the defendant doesn't agree with the verdict, they can choose to appeal to a higher court, which can then decide to hear the case or let the verdict stand. Cases where the jury returns a not-guilty verdict even though the evidence presented clearly shows that the law was broken are called jury nullification. It's a last line of defense against unjust laws.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 9 hours ago (1 child)

    While I agree, jury duty can also be extremely damaging psychologically to the random people picked for it. It's kind of a weird thing to think about that I'm just hanging out and one day could get forced into hearing gory details of a fucked up crime that will give me PTSD just because it is my civic duty. (I know most cases are not this, but is it worth it?)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -3 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

    Would you rather have 12 people from the street judging what kind of medical treatment is best for you, or just a single medical specialist?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •