5 ms·

When I see juries in American movies it always seems like a bit of an joke and manipulating them is a common plot theme. Just very random, the opposite of what

When I see juries in American movies it always seems like a bit of an joke and manipulating them is a common plot theme. Just very random, the opposite of what I expect from an justice system. Many non-authoritarian states don't use them. Most of Europe and India for instance.

deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
random9749832 10mo ago
When I think of low corruption I certainly think of India.
jpitz 10mo ago
I don't think the boring reality of most jury trials would make for an interesting screenplay.
Analemma_ 10mo ago
It’s a silly bit of theater and American exceptionalism. Infamously, “grand juries” are supposed to be a check against bringing frivolous charges, but they’ve never done this: there’s a famous quote about a prosecutor being able to get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. They’re also used to kill trials which are politically inconvenient but which the government doesn’t want to take the blame for burying, usually for killer cops: just tell the grand jury not to indict and then say “welp, nothing we could do.” All the romantic stories about jury nullification being a check against government overreach are also crap. Historically the most common use in practice, by far, was when juries would exonerate people who’d been caught dead-to-rights lynching black men.
- matthewowen 10mo ago
  Ironically, grand juries refusing to indict frivolous political charges has been in the news quite a lot in the past couple of months. It's true that jury trials have a less than perfect history of applying justice (though of course I think it's fair to say that the judges presiding over those trials exhibited similar trials so the counterfactual of a bench trial may have been the same outcome). That said, my understanding is that jury trials are just generally favorable to defendants compared to bench trials. FWIW jury trials are arguably less vulnerable to corruption, which is a benefit. Would be hard to pull off https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal#Criminal_verdicts_and_sentences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal#Criminal... (which wrongly put thousands of children in jail for the financial benefit of judges) with juries. I think calling it 'American exceptionalism" is a little reductive. The idea that a jury trial is a protector of civil rights in a system that upholds the law as something no-one is above literally dates back to Magna Carta. Suggesting that this throughline of civil liberty is "silly theater' is not a serious proposition.
- salawat 10mo ago
  Or killing a CEO perhaps? Or fighting back against tyrants/blatantly corrupt officials? Just because you didn't agree with the cases doesn't mean it was any less of an act of speech of the populace against the efforts of the authorities. Do you fear something about what the next wave of nullifications may be used for?
theoreticalmal 10mo ago
A notable exception is the 1957 movie 12 Angry Men with Henry Fonda. One of my favorites.
thadt 10mo ago
When I see juries in American courts, for example when I've served on one, it seemed like a group of people who take their job quite seriously. You are correct in that what a jury gets is a very curated set of information. The intention being to keep the jury focused on the details of a very specific situation with evidence that is processed in such a way as to be as "reliable" as possible. It is by no means an accurate or incorruptible system. When we design and prove out a better, more robust alternative, I'll be eager to learn about it.
- general1465 10mo ago
  Juries are a kangaroo courts and should be abolished. One screaming example is Emmett Till case (1955). Just this case should cause immediate abolition of that circus.
nyeah 10mo ago
I'm sure you don't mean it this way. But this comment happens to mirror the 2025 standard argument against democracy. We focus on some imperfection in democracy. The next step is we say "It's broken. Let's junk it."
billy99k 10mo ago
"joke and manipulating them is a common plot theme" Much more difficult to manipulate a bunch of jurors than pay off one judge. This is why it's mostly in the movies. "Most of Europe and India for instance." India is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Scammers with lots of money running call centers and diploma mills regularly get off completely by paying off judges. Having judges only does make me feel better. I can just pay them off when I don't want to go to jail.
JohnFen 10mo ago
Don't take what you see in movies as representative of reality. It's not.
marsupial 10mo ago
From my experience watching American TV, dogs are really good at solving mysteries.
sniggler 10mo ago
[dead]

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

random9749832 10mo ago

When I think of low corruption I certainly think of India.

jpitz 10mo ago

I don't think the boring reality of most jury trials would make for an interesting screenplay.

Analemma_ 10mo ago

It’s a silly bit of theater and American exceptionalism. Infamously, “grand juries” are supposed to be a check against bringing frivolous charges, but they’ve never done this: there’s a famous quote about a prosecutor being able to get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. They’re also used to kill trials which are politically inconvenient but which the government doesn’t want to take the blame for burying, usually for killer cops: just tell the grand jury not to indict and then say “welp, nothing we could do.” All the romantic stories about jury nullification being a check against government overreach are also crap. Historically the most common use in practice, by far, was when juries would exonerate people who’d been caught dead-to-rights lynching black men.

matthewowen 10mo ago
Ironically, grand juries refusing to indict frivolous political charges has been in the news quite a lot in the past couple of months. It's true that jury trials have a less than perfect history of applying justice (though of course I think it's fair to say that the judges presiding over those trials exhibited similar trials so the counterfactual of a bench trial may have been the same outcome). That said, my understanding is that jury trials are just generally favorable to defendants compared to bench trials. FWIW jury trials are arguably less vulnerable to corruption, which is a benefit. Would be hard to pull off https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal#Criminal_verdicts_and_sentences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal#Criminal... (which wrongly put thousands of children in jail for the financial benefit of judges) with juries. I think calling it 'American exceptionalism" is a little reductive. The idea that a jury trial is a protector of civil rights in a system that upholds the law as something no-one is above literally dates back to Magna Carta. Suggesting that this throughline of civil liberty is "silly theater' is not a serious proposition.
salawat 10mo ago
Or killing a CEO perhaps? Or fighting back against tyrants/blatantly corrupt officials? Just because you didn't agree with the cases doesn't mean it was any less of an act of speech of the populace against the efforts of the authorities. Do you fear something about what the next wave of nullifications may be used for?

theoreticalmal 10mo ago

A notable exception is the 1957 movie 12 Angry Men with Henry Fonda. One of my favorites.

thadt 10mo ago

When I see juries in American courts, for example when I've served on one, it seemed like a group of people who take their job quite seriously. You are correct in that what a jury gets is a very curated set of information. The intention being to keep the jury focused on the details of a very specific situation with evidence that is processed in such a way as to be as "reliable" as possible. It is by no means an accurate or incorruptible system. When we design and prove out a better, more robust alternative, I'll be eager to learn about it.

general1465 10mo ago
Juries are a kangaroo courts and should be abolished. One screaming example is Emmett Till case (1955). Just this case should cause immediate abolition of that circus.

nyeah 10mo ago

I'm sure you don't mean it this way. But this comment happens to mirror the 2025 standard argument against democracy. We focus on some imperfection in democracy. The next step is we say "It's broken. Let's junk it."

billy99k 10mo ago

"joke and manipulating them is a common plot theme" Much more difficult to manipulate a bunch of jurors than pay off one judge. This is why it's mostly in the movies. "Most of Europe and India for instance." India is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. Scammers with lots of money running call centers and diploma mills regularly get off completely by paying off judges. Having judges only does make me feel better. I can just pay them off when I don't want to go to jail.

JohnFen 10mo ago

Don't take what you see in movies as representative of reality. It's not.

marsupial 10mo ago

From my experience watching American TV, dogs are really good at solving mysteries.

sniggler 10mo ago

[dead]