It’s oft-repeated but nevertheless true: power corrupts. Because jurors serve infrequently, for one case at a time, and have little individual power, it’s much, much harder to buy off or otherwise influence a jury. I think that if we want to improve our justice system, we’d be best served by applying closer scrutiny to positions that act as bottlenecks of authority—judges, prosecutors, and anyone involved in jury selection.
Totally true, and it’s also unfortunate that this is just the kind of scrutiny that is hard to get in place. Apparently those with authority don’t like to implement systems that scrutinize authority. Even those without authority don’t like to scrutinize those with authority. Because those with authority don’t like people that scrutinize them!
Also note that the power of juries has become more and more limited, by way of discouraging knowledge of jury nullification, and by not letting the jury know what punishment a guilty verdict will lead to.
Totally true, and it’s also unfortunate that this is just the kind of scrutiny that is hard to get in place. Apparently those with authority don’t like to implement systems that scrutinize authority. Even those without authority don’t like to scrutinize those with authority. Because those with authority don’t like people that scrutinize them!
Also note that the power of juries has become more and more limited, by way of discouraging knowledge of jury nullification, and by not letting the jury know what punishment a guilty verdict will lead to.