So the great trial of 2010 in Chicago is over and former Governor Rod Blagojevich is free...for today. There was a mistrial on Tuesday when 11 jurors found him guilty on 23 charges and 1 juror who found him not guilty. Mistrial declared. That’s how our system works.
I think it’s time for a change. Our Appeal Courts do not work this way. Our Supreme Court does not work this way. Decisions are decided by a majority vote. So if five of our esteemed Court members vote one way and four others vote another way, the side of the five votes will be the decision makers. Simple majority rules.
With all the diversity in our land today and the differing of opinions everywhere, you rarely will get 12 people to agree on anything. Have you been asked to appear in court for jury duty lately? There are a lot of uniformed people out in the world today.
There were millions of dollars spent on the Blagojevich trial and millions more will be spent on an upcoming re-trial. Why?
The system needs to change. I propose that if 11 people in a jury of 12 find someone guilty or innocent, the party will be judged based on the majority opinion. Too often there is a book deal or TV, radio and magazine covers for the lone jurist hold out. Or often, the holdout is simply a whack-o. That should not take away from the efforts of the other 11 jurors and trial attorneys and judges involved in these cases today. Our judicial system is already a mess and cases backed up for months.
While some members of Congress are wasting time and media discussions on anchor babies, I think we should be addressing issues that really matter to our society and can make a difference in our lives. Figuring out how to change the majority rule of the current jury system should be something to consider. And it saves tax payer dollars in the process which we so desperately need. It’s time to start a revolution on a lot of these ideals folks.
Jeff
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Just because trial-by-jury does not work like a well-oiled machine EVERY time, it is still our best defense against the tyranny of the state, or the mob.
ReplyDeleteI am more than willing to continue with the current jury system, what the problem is that activist judges have excised proper jury nullification from the system, which is the right of the jury to judge the validity and morality of the law as well as the facts under which a defendant is being tried.
Some thoughts from history:
Jurors should acquit, even against the judge’s instruction… if exercising their judgment with discretion and honesty they have a clear conviction the charge of the court is wrong. — Alexander Hamilton, 1804
It is not only the juror’s right, but his duty to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment and conscience, though in direct opposition to the instruction of the court. –John Adams, 1771
I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution. — Thomas Jefferson, 1789
- Larry
Peoria, AZ