Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Hit This Poll. Down Under.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Haz.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    I come from a land downunder.
    Posts
    1,227

    Hit This Poll. Down Under.

    Justice Peter McClellan says, JURIES should be dumped from criminal trials as forensic and medical evidence gets more complicated and reluctance to serve grows, one of the state's highest-ranking judges believes. he says,

    "The complexities can be significant and the issues perplexing even for experts in the relevant field."
    .

    I agree, especially when judges fall asleep during trials! Give me a trail by jury any day!

    Read More, and link to poll:

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226221307479
    Last edited by Haz.; 12-13-2011 at 03:09 PM.
    When a criminal invades your home and has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.

    My Definition of Gun Control: The idea that dozens of people found dead in the Broadway Café, Tasmania, and many also seriously wounded, all while waiting for police, who were called to show up and protect them, is somehow morally superior to having several armed and therefore alive civilian's explaining to police how the attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Back in simpler days, a trial by jury was better than a trial by judge alone. There's a lot of evidence which indicates a trial by jury isn't exactly accurate, particularly as the best jurors are usually dismissed by one side or another. Neither the prosecutor nor the defense wants thinking people on the jury. They want people on the jury whom they can manipulate.

    So, is getting rid of the jury system altogether the answer? Not at all! Your Lord Hoo-Hoo McClellan wants to wrestle yet even more power from your people by putting the decisions in the hands of judges alone, either in a panel, or with one or two "assessors," apparently experts who're familiar with the evidence.

    The problem I have with the idea of one or two "assessors" is that my only interaction with such court "experts" (three of them) clearly demonstrated that the first was a blithering idiot, and the second and third would not overturn his findings if their lives depended on it, ostensibly out of "professional courtesy."

    I'd much rather see the jury system remaining, but with the vetting process reversed so as to ensure jurors are intelligent, objective thinkers, rather than ignorant and compliant. Most of the legal system, both down under as well as here in the U.S. are against it, however, as it would wrest power away from them and give it back to the people.

    Fancy that notion, though...
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    From before science fiction was called that (Verne's 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea) to today, we have been exposed to careful reasaoning about what would happen if juries were replaced by "justice givers" be they human or computer. The outcome is never good. Could it be that every writer is part of a 100+ year global conspiracy? Or is it really just a bad idea? You decide.

    That Justice McClellan has not been able to reach the same conclusion as thousands of writers, who were influenced by tens of thousands of philosophers, who all arrived at essentially the same conclusion, suggests that Justice McClellan is out of touch with reality.

    I left essentially these comments with the newspaper - now let's see if they get published. BTW, when I voted it was a fairly close race, 56% against doing away with juries and 44% for. That's downright scary.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Regular Member Haz.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    I come from a land downunder.
    Posts
    1,227
    Thank you friends. They wont publish my comments any more.
    When a criminal invades your home and has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.

    My Definition of Gun Control: The idea that dozens of people found dead in the Broadway Café, Tasmania, and many also seriously wounded, all while waiting for police, who were called to show up and protect them, is somehow morally superior to having several armed and therefore alive civilian's explaining to police how the attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by Haz. View Post
    Thank you friends. They wont publish my comments any more.
    I'm not holding my breath waiting to see if my comment gets published. Seems like they only want local folks to rip the Justice a new one.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  6. #6
    Regular Member Haz.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    I come from a land downunder.
    Posts
    1,227
    Verry skittish down under. They are very selective as to what they publish. They wiped me long ago. To those who say we should be up in arms about this, I say; The only arems we can get up in Down Under is the two arms connected to our sholders. We can wave our rights good buy with them.
    When a criminal invades your home and has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.

    My Definition of Gun Control: The idea that dozens of people found dead in the Broadway Café, Tasmania, and many also seriously wounded, all while waiting for police, who were called to show up and protect them, is somehow morally superior to having several armed and therefore alive civilian's explaining to police how the attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

  7. #7
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by since9
    I'd much rather see the jury system remaining, but with the vetting process reversed so as to ensure jurors are intelligent, objective thinkers, rather than ignorant and compliant.
    What a lovely concept.
    How about throwing in (in writing) the notion of a jury of your peers, instead of whoever didn't try hard enough to get out of jury duty?
    At the very least, socioeconomic status & educational level should be considered when applying the "reasonable person test, as the realities of life for a high school dropout bruddah in da hood are vastly different from those for a Harvard Med School graduate.
    When possible, people with similar training, religion, crime experience, etc. to the person on trial should be included.

    Quote Originally Posted by idiot judge
    A trial with only a judge or multiple judges will be far less time consuming and would result in significantly reduced expense to the state

    I don't think expense should be the primary consideration here.
    How about justice? Truth even?

    ETA: voting is 60/40 with about 5500 votes, against scrapping juries

    ETA2: This is completely wrong. Service is service, no matter if you're employed or not, & should be compensated the same. For trials which go beyond 10 days, the salary is:
    $102.50 a day for unemployed jurors and $230.60 a day for those with jobs
    Last edited by MKEgal; 12-14-2011 at 06:14 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    South end of the state, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    314
    I put my vote in but didn't leave a comment. Good luck to you Haz.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    ETA2: This is completely wrong. Service is service, no matter if you're employed or not, & should be compensated the same. For trials which go beyond 10 days, the salary is:
    How may I become a juror full time?

  10. #10
    Regular Member Haz.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    I come from a land downunder.
    Posts
    1,227
    Quote Originally Posted by jayspapa View Post
    I put my vote in but didn't leave a comment. Good luck to you Haz.
    Thanks for your kind regards mate. Haz.

  11. #11
    Regular Member Haz.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    I come from a land downunder.
    Posts
    1,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    How may I become a juror full time?
    Cant complain about the money being paid. Thats $250 AU per day. More than many earn working 40 plus hours per week. You can just imagin what the justice earns?
    Last edited by Haz.; 12-14-2011 at 11:31 PM.
    When a criminal invades your home and has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.

    My Definition of Gun Control: The idea that dozens of people found dead in the Broadway Café, Tasmania, and many also seriously wounded, all while waiting for police, who were called to show up and protect them, is somehow morally superior to having several armed and therefore alive civilian's explaining to police how the attacker got that fatal bullet wound.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    What a lovely concept.
    How about throwing in (in writing) the notion of a jury of your peers, instead of whoever didn't try hard enough to get out of jury duty?
    At the very least, socioeconomic status & educational level should be considered when applying the "reasonable person test, as the realities of life for a high school dropout bruddah in da hood are vastly different from those for a Harvard Med School graduate.
    When possible, people with similar training, religion, crime experience, etc. to the person on trial should be included.
    I like this idea for my socio-economic class, but I'm not sure if gang members would receive justice from other gang members.

    I don't think expense should be the primary consideration here.
    How about justice? Truth even?

    ETA: voting is 60/40 with about 5500 votes, against scrapping juries

    ETA2: This is completely wrong. Service is service, no matter if you're employed or not, & should be compensated the same.
    Agreed. Service to society should be based upon the average daily wage at poverty level. If you make more than that, you can afford the loss. If you make a lot more than that, you can really afford the loss. If you make nothing, this is an appropriate level of compensation.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •