Juries: Yes or No?
 

This has come up a couple times now, so I thought I'd polltard. What do you think of the jury system? If abolish, what would you rather see? One judge? Panel of judges? Judges + court experts? What?

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

I have been assimilated.

Private arbitrators.

(Although, like JLP, I feel like there's a possibility the implants might come out with further reading [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )

(If you just wanted to improve the current state run system then professional jurors or one judge)

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

Actually I like the idea of having my lawyer, who is really sharp, has studied for years, and can convince anyone why black is white at the drop of a hat, explain to people too dumb to get out of jury duty why I have done nothing wrong.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have been assimilated.

Private arbitrators.

[/ QUOTE ]

Private arbitrators could field juries.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

Juries for criminal, just a judge for civil.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

Make arbitration an aspect of the market, just like everything else should be.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Make arbitration an aspect of the market, just like everything else should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

K, but what's your preference in a market trial? Arbitrator who fields juries? Or one who doesn't?

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Juries for criminal, just a judge for civil.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I know why, but what's the reason for your distinction?

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Make arbitration an aspect of the market, just like everything else should be.

[/ QUOTE ]

K, but what's your preference in a market trial? Arbitrator who fields juries? Or one who doesn't?

[/ QUOTE ]


I have no meaningful way to express my preference, because it's a monopoly.

Re: Juries: Yes or No?
 

Sigh. Imagine.