Abolish the Jury System – Amelia May Johnson

submitted by [deleted] from theameliamay.cyou

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So what? But, Mom, no one else has to wear snow boots! Not a strong argument.

Stop pretending like that was my main argument. I was using it as an introduction; a lot of people might not know jury systems are rare, so that gets their attention, and then I explain why so many countries have chosen not to have them.

But I reject your “uneducated” label, I find that classist.

Again, you're taking my words out of context to build a strawman argument. The first sentence in that section is:

The chances of one juror, let alone the entire jury, being well-educated in the law are next to none.

You can't argue than twelve, random people will be well-verse in the law — it's statistically unlikely to the point of being nearly impossible. But go ahead, try it (without strawman arguments for once).

Most legal cases that even make it to a juried trial aren’t that tough.

How many strawman arguments will you build? I never said juries are wrong most of the time, I just said they're wrong more than a panel of judges would be.

All problems you cite of a jury system can absolutely be retained by shifting to judges panel system

Try to argue why that's the case without using a strawman argument.

You addresses literally zero of my points; all you did was take random quotes out of context — and you didn't even address all my points. Try again; I ain't no crow.

[–]one1wonIndependent 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I addressed your post according to my perception of it. My perception of your writing.

You can't argue than twelve, random people will be well-verse in the law — it's statistically unlikely to the point of being nearly impossible.

Who, other than you, expects jurors to be well-versed in law? I offer:

The jury is the fact-finder, but it is left to "find" facts only from the evidence which is legally admissible.

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/jury_role/

With due respect, I find this article more informative and thought provoking than your opinion piece:

https://connectusfund.org/14-important-pros-and-cons-of-the-jury-system

You don’t take disagreement with your writing well, it seems. I foolishly bought into the good faith discussion/pyramid of debate rhetoric of Saidit. Silly me. Good faith is multiple “straw man” accusations from you. Ok. I’m out.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I addressed your post according to my perception of it. My perception of your writing.

Your perception was wrong. Now that I've corrected your perception, perhaps you could try again.

Who, other than you, expects jurors to be well-versed in law?

I don't, which is why I'm against juries.

I offer:

The jury is the fact-finder, but it is left to "find" facts only from the evidence which is legally admissible.

And they found the facts wrong, in a lot of cases. Regardless, they can still find a guilty person "not guilty" or vice-versa based upon their personal biases. Re-read the part of my post about Nanavati; no one disagreed about the facts, they just didn't think he should be punished because the jurors were the same ethnicity as him and the victim was another ethnicity.

You don’t take disagreement with your writing well, it seems. I foolishly bought into the good faith discussion/pyramid of debate rhetoric of Saidit. Silly me. Good faith is multiple “straw man” accusations from you. Ok. I’m out.

LOL you can't even disprove my "accusations" even though I backed them up pretty well. I even explained what I really meant, yet you refuse to address those points, because you don't have an argument and know you're wrong. Is the Israeli government or CIA paying you per comment? Because it seems like your only goal is to waste my time and de-rail discussions.