I just posted this in another thread and it belongs here
Originally Posted by DIXIECAT
Apparently, the jurors were woefully devoid of critical thinking skills... I'm beginning to believe that "professional" jurors might be a good idea. JMHO
This has been a favorite argument of mine for a very long time. Our society has changed quite a bit since the Constitution was written and a "jury of one's peers" is just not reasonable or adequate in today's world.
Jury duty is the most essential portion of our legal system, yet we leave the end results of a criminal case in the hands of the inexperienced, the ignorant, the unwilling, the uneducated, the incapable...in other words, we rely upon the available.
I envision a professional juror, who is educated, principally on how to think critically, how to evaluate evidence or the lack thereof, how to apply the law and most importantly, how to really listen.
I envision a profession or occupation that is compensated fairly and respected for the importance of the job. A juror, after all, stands between a killer loose on the street and us.
I don't understand why we still allow a pack of people who bring nothing but their bodies to court, make decisions of overwhelming importance, which btw, cannot be altered. Even in the face of gross neglect, lack of comprehension and disobedience of court orders, a jury's verdict stands as rendered. That isn't justice.
I'm realistic in that I understand most do not agree with me. But I honestly believe that it's something that should be considered and discussed. Times change. It's time for a change in our legal system, imho.