submitted 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
 

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
[–] 13 points 9 hours ago

I don't know about the historical reasons. But I do think it is good to have some ordinary people influencing the judgement as well, rather than just some judge sitting in their ivory tower.

  • source