FabSwingers.com forum: Trial by Judge or Jury?

By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago

Unless you are debarred from sitting on a jury, you can full fill this role irrespective of your beliefs, however extreme they might be. The belief being that as a group, moderation will prevail. But these people will have little or no legal experience.

On the other hand, some countries have trial by Judge (South Africa) so the decision is going to be more technical and some might argue, more well informed. But it will be decided by one, two, or three people.

Which is best?...........

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *ucsparkMan
over a year ago

dudley

"Unless you are debarred from sitting on a jury, you can full fill this role irrespective of your beliefs, however extreme they might be. The belief being that as a group, moderation will prevail. But these people will have little or no legal experience.

Which is best?..........."

Both have there merits but we pretty much invented the idea of modern justice and it has worked up to a point, but Shakespeare had it right with his kill all the lawyers

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

what am I being charged with?

Sounds daft but if it means like life in prison then I want more people deciding my fate.

If it is like a fine or minor prison time, then I'd rather not waste a whole bunch of peoples time, so a judge, or even 2 or 3 judges

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *relanddirectMan
over a year ago

cheshire

For minor crime a judging panel, for murder etc a jury of peers but for complex financial crime etc there should be experts as a jury panel might not have the skills and concentration for a very long technical trial

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

"After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together

Mondays one was very interesting viewing

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together

Mondays one was very interesting viewing "

I need to Iplayer that one as I didn't get to watch it all

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

"After watching the life on death row series thats recently been on I couldn't choose who would be better placed to make a decision,a judge alone or a jury together

Mondays one was very interesting viewing

I need to Iplayer that one as I didn't get to watch it all"

Watch it....interesting viewing

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Solicitors used to be barred from serving on a jury. The reasoning was that they knew too much about the legal process. They are now allowed to serve. Go figure. There are issues with both trial by jury and trial by judge. No system is perfect. In either case, it is trial by human.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

By *illwill69uMan
over a year ago

moston

We have both systems...

In magistrates courts you can be tried by a bench of JP's or by a Stipendiary Magistrate or Recorder who is a junior judge. We also have trial by judge only in cases where it is felt necessary to avoid jury tampering, in the 70's we famously used this system in the 'Diplock' terrorist courts in NI.

Reply privately

Reply in forum

Reply +quote

Post new Message to Thread