9th Circuit's chief judge (3 Viewers)

[NCCommish]

After getting through Serial and The Staircase, I'm fully on board with completely renovating the jury system. We need people who know logic, understand the law, and I say we should let them ask questions too. I see no reason not to have some kind of professional juries system.

I like the idea of professional jurors but I'm not sure about the reality.

I'm not sure I'd trust "professional jurors" any more than the juries we have now, if those professionals are coming from the same general pool of people. Perhaps a system wherein the "professional jurors" are actually sitting judges. For example, one judge is assigned to case as the actual judge (same as now) , while three other judges from the district/group/area/whatever serve as the jurors.

By professional we mean some who has been educated in the law and the issues surrounding certain kinds of evidence/alleged science. Your doctor comes from the same pool we get jurors from.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I've read research that suggests that, at least at the state court level, judges who took a test that examined them for logical inconsistencies and errors did not better than laymen. I don't know if we need professional juries, but I agree strongly with Kozinski that it's high time we had cameras in the jury room so we can at least know what type of errors are common.

 

[Rirruto]

If you wanted a professional juror, you can always waive your right to a jury trial and have a bench trial instead. There's a reason most criminal defense attorneys think that's a bad move most of the time. I think sex cases are the exception to that general rule from what I've seen.