> Isnt the right to a jury trial intended to benefit the defendant by possibly providing a more "fair" evaluation of the case by a group of peers instead of a s

> Isnt the right to a jury trial intended to benefit the defendant by possibly providing a more "fair" evaluation of the case by a group of peers instead of a single judge? It seems like Google has waived this right and chosen to instead take the risk of the court alone deciding the case. It works in two directions. It is now less likely that ethics or morals have much weight for the final decision. I would argue that these were not in the side of Google. They can pay for lawyers who know the law, which is more important when there is only single judge.