re: Unanimous Juries- How ya votin and why?

quote:

---

Actually our uneducated population (jurors) make the case for non-unanimous convictions. The likelihood of an idiot on the jury whose opinion needs to be ignored is much higher.

---

I always thought it was "jury of your peers" not "jury of your educated peers"

I say on a jury while the OJ Simpson trial was just finishing. It was like a week after he was let off.
There was a guy selling Valium in a bar. He was caught by the bouncers and asked to leave. He showed his arse while leaving and got in his truck slinging rocks at the bar, hit a car and the cops came. They found several baggies with pills in his pocket. There were the bouncers and cops in the court to testify. He also had pot in his truck. A black chick would not convict the guy because she said the cops planted the pills on him. She talked another juror into not convicting him too. I forget exactly how it went because it was so long ago but the jury was hung. The smirk on that guy’s face when he heard the judge was awful. He was guilty as could be. That black woman was stupid. That guy was guilty as shite but she was not going to convict him no matter what evidence was presented. No person in their right mind would believe the cops planted Valium’s in that guy’s pocket. She was just anti cop riding the heals of the OJ case. Just like the jury that let go the black guy in Jackson that raped and burnt to death the girl a couple years ago. You can’t trust a segment of the population to make a truthful decision on facts today.

quote:

---

I know many attorneys that have tried to withdraw from criminal cases because they had not been paid and most judges here won't let them out of the case

---

If I’m a defendant that’s exactly the situation I hope I can be in.....having a pissed off attorney not getting paid extra for doing extra work in another trial and who a judge won’t let him resign as my lawyer.

Yeah, boy, I know I’ll be well represented in that situation.

Or, maybe I tell my lawyer I’ll come up with more money and pay him another fee.....

So long replies prove you’re right, and my laughing at your self righteousness ignorance means I’m uncomfortable. You’re special

I never claimed my profession was “pure”. I did claim that you haven’t the faintest idea as to what you’re talking about, though.

Don’t like it change the Constitution, voir dire procedure, state law, court rules anything connected to that, can’t blame the system for following the currently existing rules

quote:

---

Had this been a required unanimous verdict, it probably would have resulted in a hung jury.

---

Or would people be less likely to be “that guy” if they actually were the swing vote instead of being able to be ignored.

Non unanimous does give some people a chance to say they didn’t vote for it even they think the person probably belongs in prison. No guilt of convicting someone innocent, no guilt of releasing a guilty person if you are the 1 in the 11-1.

Going unanimous changes the dynamics greatly

quote:

---

Just curious, how many juries have you sat on to include murder?

---

WTF difference does that make?

Am I claiming to know anything about juries?

Jeebus you frick's have no concept of why the argument is even being made. "Oh, have YOU been on a jury!!!!"

Idiots

quote:

---

The point is if you have never been a part of it, you have no idea what it is all about. TV makes it look so easy and everything is wrapped up in an hour. To believe that every juror reacts the same is simply not true.

---

IDGAF about TV. I'm not retarded. I know TV is make believe.

On what planet did you get some idea that I think juries work like they do on Law and Order?

quote:

---

And your “claim” is worthless.

---

And your rank speculation concerning how the legal profession functions is less than.

quote:

---

And your rank speculation concerning how the legal profession

---

It’s not speculation. It’s years of real world experience including hearing my lawyer friends laugh about how they screwed some poor schmuck who thought they were looking out for him.

One last thought on the amendment: if it passes it means a 10-2 vote for acquittal won’t acquit the defendant. He’ll have to go through another trial when now he would go free.

Everyone in this thread has been obsessing about innocent defendants being convicted by a 10-2 jury decision but it also means someone who is innocent won’t go free unless a unanimous not guilty verdict can be obtained.