Supporters of the person would just vote non-guilty and opponents would just vote guilty. It would just result in hung juries over and over.

  • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    You can’t just balance out the bias though.

    If one juror just plain will not return a guilty or not guilty verdict, then the whole trial is for naught.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pretty sure it’s a hung jury and they do it again (or bring in an alternate that’s been in the trial watching every thing as well.)

      You’re right it’s a problem. Would you prefer trial by combat?

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d prefer trial by ordeal. Hog tie him and toss him in a pond. Sinking? Innocent. Floating guilty.

          The problem is this system would almost certainly opress more people.

          Our current system is quite flawed. But it’s not nearly as flawed as it could be