4 ms·

> You mean a bunch of random people who have no vested interest in the trial's outcome, and so can't be gamed or stacked for or against you in a premeditated fa

> You mean a bunch of random people who have no vested interest in the trial's outcome, and so can't be gamed or stacked for or against you in a premeditated fashion This is not how juries are formed. The parties can refuse jurors and you can refuse yourself if you are chosen.

naasking 9y ago
I fail to see how this negates anything in that passage that you quoted. In what way can the jury be stacked for or against you, premeditatively?
- gambiting 9y ago
  There's loads of scenarios like that. All white jury against a black defendant comes to mind(or all black against white or any other combination you can think of). There's also plenty of research showing that juries are more likely to be sympathetic if you are attractive or someone they can identify with, with unattractive people/people from other social classes getting worse verdicts for the same crime. That's not to say that judges do not exhibit such biases, but once again - they should be trained specifically against that. There is no such training or expectation on the juries. And yes, of course juries are asked "do you have any bias against this person" but I don't believe for a second that actually works.
  - naasking 9y ago
    Nothing you've listed is premeditated. Jury candidate selection is random, so premeditation is literally impossible unless the candidate selection process itself is compromised. Certainly you can introduce bias in the jury vetting process, but that's what your defense attorney is for.
    - gambiting 9y ago
      Well in that case judge selection also can't be premeditated since you get a random judge, no?
      - naasking 9y ago
        A small number of judges in a given region to corrupt or coerce, but still doable. Can't say the same for jury candidate selection. Furthermore, your defense attorney has the opportunity to filter out jurors that have bias against their client. Not so for judges.
      - b_t_s 9y ago
        randomly selected how? By the order a $9 an hour secretary enters stuff into an excel spreadsheet? In some places yes. Even if it is random(normal case)...random selection of which old rich jaded PHD holding white guy you get? In many places yes.
michaelt 9y ago
In the UK system juries are selected randomly, and there is essentially no selection* Nothing like the American system, where the lawyers can go through 250 candidates to choose 12 jurors, letting them choose the race, gender, education and class composition of the jury. *Challenges are possible, such as if the random selection procedure wasn't followed properly or if a juror knows people involved, but it's very unusual.
- lurquer 9y ago
  Lawyers in America do not choose jurors. They exclude jurors. Big difference. Each side -- depending on the state and level of court -- gets a certain number of premptory challenges; that is, they can exclude N jurors without giving a reason. After that, the only way to exclude a juror is to prove to the Judge that the juror is biased.

naasking 9y ago

I fail to see how this negates anything in that passage that you quoted. In what way can the jury be stacked for or against you, premeditatively?

gambiting 9y ago
There's loads of scenarios like that. All white jury against a black defendant comes to mind(or all black against white or any other combination you can think of). There's also plenty of research showing that juries are more likely to be sympathetic if you are attractive or someone they can identify with, with unattractive people/people from other social classes getting worse verdicts for the same crime. That's not to say that judges do not exhibit such biases, but once again - they should be trained specifically against that. There is no such training or expectation on the juries. And yes, of course juries are asked "do you have any bias against this person" but I don't believe for a second that actually works.
- naasking 9y ago
  Nothing you've listed is premeditated. Jury candidate selection is random, so premeditation is literally impossible unless the candidate selection process itself is compromised. Certainly you can introduce bias in the jury vetting process, but that's what your defense attorney is for.
  - gambiting 9y ago
    Well in that case judge selection also can't be premeditated since you get a random judge, no?
    - naasking 9y ago
      A small number of judges in a given region to corrupt or coerce, but still doable. Can't say the same for jury candidate selection. Furthermore, your defense attorney has the opportunity to filter out jurors that have bias against their client. Not so for judges.
    - b_t_s 9y ago
      randomly selected how? By the order a $9 an hour secretary enters stuff into an excel spreadsheet? In some places yes. Even if it is random(normal case)...random selection of which old rich jaded PHD holding white guy you get? In many places yes.

michaelt 9y ago

In the UK system juries are selected randomly, and there is essentially no selection* Nothing like the American system, where the lawyers can go through 250 candidates to choose 12 jurors, letting them choose the race, gender, education and class composition of the jury. *Challenges are possible, such as if the random selection procedure wasn't followed properly or if a juror knows people involved, but it's very unusual.

lurquer 9y ago
Lawyers in America do not choose jurors. They exclude jurors. Big difference. Each side -- depending on the state and level of court -- gets a certain number of premptory challenges; that is, they can exclude N jurors without giving a reason. After that, the only way to exclude a juror is to prove to the Judge that the juror is biased.