[Jim Noble]

If a hold-out juror can be replaced with a more compliant one, then what is the point of having a trial if we can just replace jurors during deliberations unitl we get one that votes the way we want?

100% A+

BTTT.

In our system, "deliberation" does not mean a group of jurors beating on other jurors. The process contains some magic, which is how it's supposed to work.

I don't know if it should be kept or not, but it's an ancient part of our traditions.

[Political Junkie Too]

Thanks for the mega-bump. I appreciate the common sentiment.

I am curious about your disclaimer that despite the "tradition" being "ancient," you're open to its removal going forward.

What is it about "keeping or not" a panel of independent thinking jurors who are drawn from the same community of the defendant that you question should be kept or discarded?

-PJ