A judge is (hopefully) trained and experienced with questioning both sides of the argument and weighing the arguments. While jurors just have their natural intu

A judge is (hopefully) trained and experienced with questioning both sides of the argument and weighing the arguments. While jurors just have their natural intuition. Here in Germany we have a system were "volunteer" judges are elected from the general public. On lower levels there then are two volunteer and one regular judge*, where the regular judge is leading the trial, but volunteers got same right to ask question and votes are equal, thus the two volunteers could overrule the regular judge, (both for deciding whether guilty or not and the punishment) while in most cases they probably follow the suggestion of the regular judge. If the verdict is challenged upper courts only have regular judges. Goal is to have, both the legal expertise, but also the "common sense" in the ruling. * in some cases the numbers may be different, there are sometimes 3 regular and two volunteer or something in between