I see a common assumption on the thread that if jury duty was made non-compulsory that nothing else could be changed in order to prevent problems that would otherwise arise.
For example, if jury duty sucks so badly that the kind of people who will volunteer will be people who accept bribes we could just change the entire nature of what being a juror entails i.e. higher pay, maybe even a juror's union.
Personally, I think you should have to go to college and get a degree to be a juror. I've read about so many cases where someone is convicted even though based on the evidence presented I can't understand how someone could be "convinced beyond a reasonable doubt". I've come to the conclusion that a lot of juries vote according to emotion. I've seen many rape cases where none of the evidence was inconsistent with the possibility that the sex was consentual yet the guy got convicted anyways. If we're going to make "beyond a reasonable doubt" actually apply we need professional jurors trained and educated in a certain way. What way? I don't know, that would take a great deal of analysis to figure out but it can and should be done.
19 Feb 2011, 9:07 pm
