4 ms·
This is not really accurate - defendants have a right to a jury trial, a right that they can waive for the opportunity to have a bench trial (trying their case
by Fezzik 8y ago
This is not really accurate - defendants have a right to a jury trial, a right that they can waive for the opportunity to have a bench trial (trying their case before a “professional judge”). The prosecution has zero say in whether or not a case is tried to jurors or a judge. The reason most defendants do not waive this right is because their odds of winning over/convincing a lay jury are much better than with a judge. At least according to any defense attorney I have talked with that is why.
- Amezarak 8y agoFor some reason every time the topic comes up, people come out of the woodwork talking about how bad the jury system is for defendants, while ignoring this exact point: the defendant has a right to a jury trial, but he can waive it and have a bench trial instead. In fact, the state would much rather you waive your right to a jury trial since they’re more expensive and much more of a procedural drain on the court system. If you’re a defendant and you think you have a better shot with a jury, you choose a jury trial. If you think you have an unsympathetic but legally justified case, you pick a bench trial. Either way, it’s your choice, and I have difficulty understand how it could be inferior to a system where you’re deprived of the choice and subjected solely to the judgement of an unelected permanent bureaucracy. I can assure people that years of legal dedication and training and the connections to get a judgeship does not by any means mean that someone is a good judge, and I’m becoming increasing convinced it has a pernicious impact on the legal system as a whole.