r/law • u/bendubberley_ • 15h ago

Legal News The judge in the Lindsay Clancy case is admonishing jurors who are refusing to follow his instructions

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

10.1k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

219

u/thakemist 11h ago

This is the issue with a jury of your peers. Most of our peers are idiots

95

u/StockQuahog 10h ago

Same problem voting

3

u/Freakn_Deadpool 5h ago

Once again, lack of resources in public education shows it’s true colors. Wish we cared about it as much as COMMUNIST China does

2

u/Lobenz 5h ago

George Carlin was referring to voters as well as jurors.

1

u/siccoblue 8h ago

They are literally voting on a verdict my dude

8

u/Salt-Lingonberry-853 7h ago

He's talking about regular old (political) voting, not jurors voting on a verdict.

1

u/LowlySysadmin 7h ago

One affects a small number of people (often one!), the other affects all of us

36

u/Torgud_ 10h ago

The median American can't even read at a 12th grade level. They're barely literate morons.

2

u/sumptin_wierd 6h ago

yeah but we got one over on the commies or something amiright

9

u/MortgageRegular2509 9h ago

Three scariest words in the English language are “trial by jury”

2

u/diggitydonegone 5h ago

Most high functioning people have jobs that often disqualify them from making it through voir dire. And many more people move heaven and earth not to be selected. So, often a jury of our peers is not a good cross section of society.

Depending on the type of charge against me, I would potentially choose a no jury trial.

1

u/Lobenz 5h ago

George Carlin said it best.

1

u/matango613 1h ago

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

1

u/Ordinary-Egg-56 8h ago

the fix is simple but of course it will never happen because conservatives won’t let it.

unemployed people can be excused from jury service or paid a fair and reasonable amount for their time (so absolutely not min wage). employed people are protected from losing their job for serving on jury either during or after, their employer continues to pay them during that time and absolutely nothing changes (benefits or otherwise).

next we start celebrating jurors and thanking them for the service they provide. maybe some actual perks or rewards (jurors discount?), public info campaign reminding people it’s their duty in a democracy and people should be willing happy and proud to serve. we’ve all been judged fairly or unfairly in those same courtrooms (or elsewhere) in our lives. don’t we want to return the favor (or correct the mistake by serving impartiality following instruction and considering all the facts).

or a diversity campaign! we can’t have one homogenous group of jurors deciding everybody’s fate. if you’re a minority or literally a whatever job/hobby/interest wouldn’t you want one of your peers on your jury deciding your fate !? then go down and take your turn doing that for someone in your community so someone else does the same for you.

hm i think i would make an excellent politician besides all the winning elections stuff.

-1

u/[deleted] 10h ago

[deleted]

2

u/OurCrewIsReplaceable 9h ago

Great point, my peer!