This is a tough one. Yes, humans have flaws, humans can be misled and tricked, and humans can also allow their own biases to affect their decisions. However, the Constitution does guarantee the right to a trial by a jury of one's peers. The alternatives are not better. At least with a jury it takes more than a single person's biases to affect the outcome. In other systems where there is no jury the defendant's fate can lie in the hands of a single jurist or leader.
people believe what they want. in reality a member of a jury is in most cases going to have preconceived ideas and prejudices.
if people think something is right then they will convince themselves of this even if evidence says otherwise.
as was stated with the lawyer issue, people can be mislead with jargon, emotion and lawyers focusing on irrelevant issues.
i think we expect the jury to act as a emotionless computer in a sense, i dont think its a job fit for must humans today because we are far from that.
It's hard to say whether the laws and the rules regarding trials and evidence are intentionally misleading or just antiquated. However, I think most people would agree that the current system is anything but straightforward. As Lincoln said (I'm paraphrasing) anyone who defends himself has an idiot for a client. It's sad, but it's true. Our system is far too convoluted for a "regular" person to make sense of it.
the system is a labyrinth of loopholes and confusion.
a lot of the time it comes down to your socio economic status.
i think that they are intentionally misleading in some cases, particularly cases that affect minorities or poorer people.
theres no doubt in my mind that the system is designed to keep a large section of the population down in the dirt.
why else would we have laws that make victimless crimes illegal
The finality of the death penalty would indicate that it should not be imposed unless there is absolute certainty. You can't go back and release the guy afterwards, right? Perhaps I would support the death penalty if our legal system hadn't devolved into such a circus.
well you would think but we have seen many a time that evidence is not always the key issue in many cases.
i know what you mean, there are some cases that would bring the death penalty into question but even then rehabilitation and education should be tried.
but i really think that having proper and correct systems in place is dependant on having a just and compassionate society.
