• fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    2 days ago

    That’s not really how jury’s work though.

    You’re not there to dispense justice. You’re there to decide whether the defendant is guilty of the charges against him.

    Someone will be along in a moment to tell us all about Jury Nullification, a refusal to find the defendant guilty on the grounds that it would be unjust, despite the defendant’s obvious guilt.

    This pretty much reduces the court process to a popularity contest - how does the jury “feel” about the defendant, what are the “vibes” of the circumstances before them.

    Jurors determine guilt, and judges determine punishments. The separation of these concerns is the best way we have found to mitigate corruption since the advent of written laws. The outcome of a specific case may be unjust, but the system produces the fewest unjust outcomes.

    • Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      60,000 Americans die every year because of the insurance industry, but how many oligarchs were brought to justice? How many oligarchs were arrested for raping children on Epstein’s island? How many oligarchs were arrested for funding Israel’s genocide of Gaza? How many oligarchs were arrested for the massive tax evasion revealed from the Panama papers???

      Justice that only punches down is not justice. If our system will not hold the wealthy accountable for their crimes against humanity then our system is utterly rotten

      • fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Everything you said is true, but it doesn’t really contradict my point.

        The current system is terrible, but it’s better than having a jury of laypeople make up the law based on the vibe of the case.

        I look forward to hearing your suggestions for a better judicial system.

        • exploitedamerican@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          A better judicial system, one where it implicitly illegal for those with money to receive preferential treatment. And one where victimless crimes built on abstract ideals of abstinence only moralism dont ruin the lives of marginalized people while wealthy privileged individuals engage in these same behaviors with impunity, and one where qualified immunity isn’t grossly abused to avoid consequence for a militarized police force and portray a fantasy image tjat police generally always have a pristine moral compass and aren’t just flawed human beings with a propensity to abuse their power in a system with so many unjust laws that are designed to favor those with privilege and wealth.

          How about just that for starters and i will get back to you for any further improvements.

    • JasonDJ@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Dude your last sentence was the cherry garnish in a big cup of government Kool aid.

      A just system wouldn’t have 98% of its convictions arriving out of plea deals.

      A just system wouldn’t jail a dude for stealing bread from a company that steals money from all of its employees. Employees that are already so underpaid, that they qualify for food stamps, that largely get spent at the same damn company.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        I never said the system was just.

        Merely pointing out that separating the finding of guilt from the determination of punishment is the best way we have to mitigate corruption.

        I look forward to hearing your suggestions for a better system.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      Maybe they should fix the justice system if they want juries to actually act like they’re intended to.

      But they won’t, billionaires, CEOs, business execs, and other parasites will continue to do what they like and harm who they like with a slap on the wrist at most.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@lemmy.federate.cc
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Who is “they” and how might they “fix” the justice system ?

        More than half of American voters just chose to subvert the already ineffective legal system, to install a corrupt felon as dictator.

        Are you proposing that allowing a jury of peers drawn from this public ought to be able to make up the law based on the vibe of cases before them ?

        • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          23 hours ago

          Who is “they” and how might they “fix” the justice system ?

          The oligarchs that own the country.

          Are you proposing that allowing a jury of peers drawn from this public ought to be able to make up the law based on the vibe of cases before them ?

          I’m proposing that the inherent protections the judicial system gives people be used to protect Luigi.

          Justice is dead so long as billionaires can cause immeasurable death and suffering without repercussions.

          You’re operating under the incorrect assumption that the public can control the law.

          If that were the case you’d be right. But as of right now, this is the only check on their power. And it is an intentional check. The 2A was put in place to fight tyrants if it came to it, and it is quickly coming to it.