To Taser or Not To Taser? (66)

Honestly not every case is the same, no situation is the same.
Every case is opened to the interpretation of the law, this is what is known as a fair system. The lawyers are there to present an alternative view to the prosecutor. The final word on the verdict is done by common people known as Jury…. they are the ones who say guilty or not. The Judges job then is to summarise all the information before him including the verdict and pass judgment. So if anybody is to blame is the jury and not the system.

Bad cops do good things, after all they do have to justify why they are there. And there are good cops amongst the bad ones, known as whistle blowers. Here is the thing they need to run to the news papers first for protection because the whole damn system is infiltrated with criminals…. fact bud.

And having served on several Juries I would have to accept that blame. And i say its a failure in the system.

Lawyers attempt to fix (I know not quite the right word but it will suffice) the jury by assuming a persons character by their looks. Then in the backroom no wants to actually be there so will say and do almost anything to get the responsibilty over and done with as soon as possible. The bossy and Know it alls try to take over and those that don't care say nothing. The verdict is seldom a reflection of the facts. (Opinion only)

I know I did it. I stood my ground and said not guilty in a molestation case. There were no facts in my view to say it was so. But in the end I caved to peer pressure and went with the crowd.

I am in the wrong I admit. But How many other juries go the same way. Judges are paidto do this job. They should make the decisions and there decision should be final pending new evidence being submitted. Juries should not exist.

What type of system should we have then to make it even remotely fair? This is one of the only way to make it as fair as possible, by letting people do the stoning so to speak. I’ve done jury duty once got called up 3 times.

I stand my ground and tell them to convince me and not to tell me which way my vote will go.

im only a truck driver Mr AA f all edumacation & i know when im licked & when to bale out. I can only go on my life experiences & encounters with the police good & bad. As im working my butt off all week in amongst moron car drivers I dont get to read papers or listen to media gossip, so u may have the heads up on me there Ive only learnt my experiences on the streets in real life.

6 days on a jury & i will never do it again, had to catch train coz it was about $35 to park in city c/park Who r the crims

There is no right or wrong we share our opinions via this form of media. Im never going to change your opinion nor you mine. Our view changes when we can open our mind to all information.

u back to nice again U sure u have'nt got 10 more sleeps till xmas or tasmanian

I say the Judge does what he is paid to do. Make a ruling. He sits there and listens to the lawyers. The judge knows the law just as well as the lawyers. Why leave it to Country Bumpkin to make a decision. And they go "Oh she a girl and she pretty so she couldn't do that.

And as an aside. Why only a jury in criminal law. Why not a jury in other forms of law as well. I'd like to have had my custody battle in front of a Jury.

But no A bloody judge got to make his decision there in a custody battle without any help from joe public jury. So why does the judge need an escape clause in criminal law.

"Oh I'm sorry MR Hells Angel gang leader. I didn't say you were a bad guy; They did. If it was up to me I'd buy you a coffee and set you on your way."