I say if you dont have a college degree you dont get on the jury.We need smarter people on the jurrors instead of High School dropouts and people who are on Welfare or other goverment programs.And we wouldnt have Stupid verdits like the O.J Simpson trial,Micheal Jackson Trial and Robert Blake trial

So instead of being either found guilty or not guilty by a wide diversity of people, coming from all layers of society, thus making sure that the defendant is looked upon in many different ways and from many different angles... you would rather just have some intelligencia running the show?

__________________
There's no theory of evolution, only a list of creatures Chuck Norris allows to live...

Is a college decree the same as university degree or something different ? Bear in mind I'm from Britain so the terminology might be somewhat different over here.

The differance between american courts and British courts are Lawyers can perform like a circus event in a trial. In British courts the judge wont allow lawyers act like clowns or an acting scene.American judges allow lawyers act like drama actors to make the jury belive in certain theories and juries will buy it sometimes.Just like in a TV commercial it makes you go out and buy that product. But in british courts if you acted like that the judge will throw the book at you and warn you next time you perform that stunt i will throw you in jail. Thats why you see stupidity in O.J Simpson Trail, Micheal Jackson Trial and Robert Blake trial because its a circus!

Oh, I get it, if the prisoner isn't found guilty, the Jury didn't do it's job, RIGHT????? You are getting more irrational all the time.

The Jury is just plain stupid sometimes.Why dont they put more quilfied lawyers to defend you instead of some backwoods high school dropout public defender.And More quilfied Jurors whos been to college a higher IQ than some welfare goon whos on food stamps,Wic and other welfare services who doesnt have a clue what the defender did.

Steve, have you actually been to a jury trial, or are you basing your opinion on movies & TV?

__________________
When they come a wull staun ma groon
Staun ma groon al nae be afraid
Thoughts awe hame tak awa ma fear
Sweat an bluid hide ma veil awe tears

Yes, same thing, college = university.

But there are plenty of people who have degrees in majors like child rearing or liberal arts.

What do those degrees lend to making a decision?

Anyways the constitution requires a trial by peers.

By limiting jury members to college grads only it would certainly deny that right to many people.

There could be a professional jury system I guess because one should be concerned that only the time-endowed are EVER going to sit on a jury in 99% of the cases.

__________________
"Send a salami to your boy in the Army" Jerky Boys.

Juries are smarter than you think. I wouldn't go after the jury, I'd much rather look at the too restrictive rules of evidence to improve the cj system.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

If Juries are smarter than you think.Then how come O.J Simpson went free? How come Micheal Jackson went free? How come Robert Blake went free? Explain those reasons.

I didn't say ALL juries, I was generalising. If OJ went free I'd put it down to the really crappy job by the LAPD investigators. As for Jackson and Blake, perhaps the admissible evidence just wasn't there.

Juries are capable of dispensing mercy. It has a long history in the common law. Have you ever read William Penn's trial? If not you should, it's instructive as to how a jury can be a bulwark against government oppression.

Call me sentimental if you like but I trust juries. If a case goes in front of a jury it should get plenty of scrutiny. And I suppose really a jury never gets it "wrong" as a point of logic. Sometimes due to archaic laws on the admissibility of evidence they may not convict but it's not their fault.

__________________
"There were no D-Day Heroes in 1973" - Cold Chisel Khe Sanh

You choose three very high profile cases in which the accused had alot of money to throw towards their defense.

I would guess that these three don't represent anywhere near the norm as a standing for the vast majority of those facing trial.

If those three did represent the majority then how come the prisons are overflowing with prisoners? Especially in California for example? {All three of those trials were in California} {And really they were in one tiny geographic region of the state}

__________________
"Send a salami to your boy in the Army" Jerky Boys.

'The Jury is just plain stupid sometimes.Why dont they put more quilfied lawyers to defend you instead of some backwoods high school dropout public defender.And More quilfied Jurors whos been to college a higher IQ than some welfare goon whos on food stamps,Wic and other welfare services who doesnt have a clue what the defender did.'- Steveox #6.

Steve, do you believe that it was a good idea to combine courts of equity and law?
__________________

Not in todays world. Why you think Vermont is a corrupted state with corrupted judges now?