Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should We Abolish the Jury System?
Townhall.com ^ | July 6, 2011 | Ben Shapiro

Posted on 07/06/2011 6:32:41 AM PDT by Kaslin

On Tuesday, a Florida jury found Casey Anthony not guilty of first-degree murder in the death of her 2-year-old daughter, Caylee Marie.

As so often happens in high profile cases, the jury was wrong.

Casey clearly murdered her daughter. Her mom, Cindy, reported that Caylee was missing on July 15, 2008. Casey's cover story was unbelievably ridiculous. When Casey's mom, Cindy, confronted Casey at Casey's boyfriend's apartment, Casey actually claimed that a random baby sitter nobody had ever met had taken Caylee away over a month beforehand.

Cindy called the cops, informing them, "I found my daughter's car today. And it smells like there's been a dead body in the damn car." Sure enough, cadaver dogs identified the trunk of Casey's car as a dead body location, and scientists confirmed that a body had decomposed back there. A few months after a jury indicted Casey, police found Caylee's corpse in the woods near Casey's home, duct tape on her head.

The defense did a Johnny Cochrane routine -- they blamed everybody within a 10 mile radius of the murder for the murder. Defense attorney Jose Baez suggested that Casey's dad, George, had sexually abused her during her childhood, without any evidence whatsoever. Baez also claimed that Caylee had drowned in the pool while George was at home, and that George had been involved in dumping the body.

There was no evidence to any of this. It was pure conjecture, a sociopathic response to being caught red-handed. And Casey Anthony is a sociopath: outwardly charming, pathologically lying, indecently self-centered, lacking in shame or guilt, promiscuous, exploitative and irresponsible, and willing to hurt anyone and everyone in order to get her way.

So, why did the jury acquit her? Because the jury system, as currently run, is stupid.

Yes, jury trial is guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution (although only with regard to federal cases). It was originally considered a hallmark of civilized criminal justice because citizens did not want to be subjected to government inquisitions, with the court stacked against them. Juries were supposed to be a bulwark against governmental encroachment.

Nowadays, juries have become a hallmark of our heavily bureaucratized system. Those who have day jobs are eager to avoid serving on juries, mainly because the convoluted rules of procedure and evidence have turned summary trials into week-long events. By and large, only the least offensive -- and not coincidentally, the dumbest -- tend to be selected for juries. As the aphorism goes, the problem with juries is that they are generally composed of the 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty.

The phrase "show trial" now means something different -- it means a trial that is a show. That's precisely what O.J. and Casey Anthony were about. Every juror expects to see Sam Waterston get up and deliver opening remarks, and damned if the court system won't do its best to provide that entertainment. The provision of the Constitution that requires a public trial is now used to ensure that trials become media circuses.

Should we embrace the European inquisitorial system, in which judges ask the questions and come up with the decisions? Should we hire professional jurors?

The answer doesn't lie in abolishing the jury system utterly, but in revamping it completely.

The rationale behind juries is still important, particularly with regard to politically-oriented trials: We don't want judges paid by government to have full authority to condemn those of different political persuasions. And the rationale behind a public trial is also still relevant -- we don't want Star Chambers or clandestine hearings. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

By the same token, however, our current jury system is broken beyond repair. If we are truly to restore justice to our system of justice, we must pursue the best and brightest for service, make it easier for them to serve, make the rules of evidence and procedure more efficient, and allow justice to run more smoothly. Most Americans would be willing to serve on a jury for a day. Few would be willing to do so for a week and even fewer for a month. We need more day-long trials and less month-long trials. We need more justice and less showmanship.

Caylee Anthony, sadly, wasn't just the victim of her mother here. She was the victim of a system that did not mete out justice to her murderer. There will be many more cases like Caylee Anthony until we do something to solve this mess.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-193 next last
To: Kaslin

Ben Shapiro, meet Nancy Dis-Grace. I’m sure the two of you will get along famously!


21 posted on 07/06/2011 6:44:05 AM PDT by Peter from Rutland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Oh, absolutely. Because one jury believed a prosecutor hadn’t proved a case beyond a reasonable doubt, we should replace trial by jury with trial by Ben Shapiro, the Philosopher-King. That’ll assure justice for all.
I love it when the first response-post of the thread is also the best post of the thread. Good work, Tax-chick.
22 posted on 07/06/2011 6:44:25 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
--of all of the garbage about this trial I have tried to ignore, this has to be the worst.

--she was acquitted by a jury who were present at the trial and heard the evidence---period.

23 posted on 07/06/2011 6:45:05 AM PDT by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the media or government says about firearms or explosives--)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I want Democrats to decide everything. /sarcasm


24 posted on 07/06/2011 6:45:20 AM PDT by bmwcyle (Obama is a Communist, a muslim, and an illegal alien)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
The Scott Peterson case: They never knew when, where or how Lacey Peterson died.

Same basics...I wanna play...no responsibility. Scott's in jail...Casey's in a hotel...smirking....

25 posted on 07/06/2011 6:45:28 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

True.


26 posted on 07/06/2011 6:46:20 AM PDT by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Can you imagine taking away trial by jury and giving that power to the government?


27 posted on 07/06/2011 6:46:53 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

I’m not assessing the competence of these specific jurors. I should have included quote marks instead of the air quotes I used, as I was mocking Ben Shapiro’s assessment of the competence of jurors in general.


28 posted on 07/06/2011 6:47:24 AM PDT by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Right on! and while we are at it why have a trial? It is time to get a real justice system unencumbered by stupid old rules made up 300 years ago by White Rich Slave Owners. Just look at this mess. Think of all the tax money that could be saved. Hell we could take Yankee Stadium and put that witch in there on live tv. Then we could have an internet vote to burn her or let her go. Just think how much fun that would be. Now that would be real Democracy and provide entertainment.


29 posted on 07/06/2011 6:47:37 AM PDT by screaminsunshine (Socialism...Easier said than done.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Heck no, a jury is your one small chance, the wild card so to speak, in a mostly rigged judicial system. You would stand no chance if you got somebody in the legal establishment down on you if we were under a European style system where trials were conducted by three judge panels.

I worked in a small town law office during my college days and all my beliefs in a fair and impartial system were quickly shattered. I know for a fact that the result of many trials were decided over lunch before the trial ever took place, which isn't too hard when the judge, the prosecuting attorney and the public defender all were old buddies from law school who ate lunch together most days. The entire system is basically a legal mafia, with members of the legal profession watching out for each other.

30 posted on 07/06/2011 6:47:41 AM PDT by apillar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: samtheman

Thank you very much!

I usually like Ben’s articles, but this is “Quest for Cosmic Justice” stuff, and it’s a pipe dream. He should have recognized this and trashed it instead of hitting “send” to Townhall.


31 posted on 07/06/2011 6:48:40 AM PDT by Tax-chick ("This is a revolution, damn it! We're going to have to offend somebody!" ~ John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I am amazed by the prevalent attitude to Jury duty that I see in the States.

Honor the Jurors. Greatly increase the compensation/tax breaks for Jurors. Greatly increase their living standards and accorded respect while sitting on Juries. At the same time - make it much harder to get out of Jury service.

Anyone who says something like "he/she was too stupid to get out of Jury service" should be regarded as a slope-shouldered idiot.

32 posted on 07/06/2011 6:48:57 AM PDT by agere_contra ("Debt is the foundation of destruction" : Sarah Palin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

NO!

It is one of the last bastions of citizen power.


33 posted on 07/06/2011 6:49:56 AM PDT by Scanian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Well said.


34 posted on 07/06/2011 6:50:03 AM PDT by FourPeas ("Maladjusted and wigging out is no way to go through life, son." -hg)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Nowadays, juries have become a hallmark of our heavily bureaucratized system. Those who have day jobs are eager to avoid serving on juries, mainly because the convoluted rules of procedure and evidence have turned summary trials into week-long events. By and large, only the least offensive -- and not coincidentally, the dumbest -- tend to be selected for juries. As the aphorism goes, the problem with juries is that they are generally composed of the 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty.

Obviously, we should have trial by those that really, really closely follow the story on the news. /s

A recent jury that I was on had a retired military officer, a doctor, a lawyer, an accountant, a chef, the wife of a retired cop, a naturalized citizen from Ireland...among others.

I'm curious as to how many folks here ranting about juries have ever served on a jury in a criminal trial.

35 posted on 07/06/2011 6:50:15 AM PDT by Mr.Unique (The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
To the extent that the jury system needs revamping, it is in the direction of giving juries greater leeway to even override unjust laws (i.e. jury nullification), if necessary, not making juries more subservient to judges and prosecutors.

The best way to revamp the jury system would be to disallow removal of a juror without a direct statement of cause. Conflict of interest can't be allowed on the jury. But that is a demonstrable cause for dismissal. Anything short of that and the jury selection should be random, no exceptions.

Second, no or limited continuances. Once the jury is seated the trial moves forward. No breaks, no holidays, no CNN interviews and no golf games for the lawyers. If a trial goes more than one day the prosecutors and lawyers get to sleep in bunk beds in a back room of the court house. Just watch how few year long trials you see when the billion dollar lawyers have to give up their pampered poodle lives while the trial is in process.
36 posted on 07/06/2011 6:50:28 AM PDT by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
Can you imagine taking away trial by jury and giving that power to the government?

Irreparable harm was already done when the supreme court ruled that "Jurors need not be informed of their rights".
37 posted on 07/06/2011 6:50:36 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: nonliberal
Agreed. If the prosecution cannot even establish how Caylee died, there is really no proof a crime was committed.

That's a total pile of crap.

We find skeletons all the time without knowing exactly how the victim died. All that usually is ever proven in such cases is WHO put the skeleton there.

We know that the Anthony She-devil was driving around with her little girl's rotting corpse in the trunk - her mouth and nose taped shut with duct tape.

I suppose the morons amongst us need the video tape, but some of us don't.

38 posted on 07/06/2011 6:50:57 AM PDT by AAABEST (Et lux in tenebris lucet: et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

There used to be rules as to who could serve on a jury. There are still some rules limiting who may serve but in many instances they are ignored.


39 posted on 07/06/2011 6:50:57 AM PDT by AEMILIUS PAULUS (It is a shame that when these people give a riot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The jury of her peers made their decision. The Constitution did not specify that all decisions would be to everyone’s liking.

Move along.


40 posted on 07/06/2011 6:51:13 AM PDT by VanDeKoik (1 million in stimulus dollars paid for this tagline!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 181-193 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson