3 ms·
Convictions would go down a lot without the social pressure element that's for sure. But with a sufficient number of jurors it'd become impossible to convict ev
by hackerlight 3y ago
Convictions would go down a lot without the social pressure element that's for sure. But with a sufficient number of jurors it'd become impossible to convict even if the person is clearly guilty, because you just need one to dissent.
- Ekaros 3y agoSounds like then there is not sufficient proof given. Or maybe that one juror doesn't agree with the law. Also reasonable reason to let people go free.
- hackerlight 3y ago> Sounds like then there is not sufficient proof given You can always find 1 person who will disagree about anything? If you have 1000 jurors that each vote independently I would find it hard to imagine that anyone can get convicted, even people you are basically certain are guilty. After some N, the probability of a conviction becomes indistinguishable from 0, which is not a good system either.
- AnthonyMouse 3y agoThe number is typically 12 rather than 1000, and it's pretty unambiguous that it's possible to convince 12 random people to convict someone when the evidence is clear. And sometimes when it isn't.