• SoyViking [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    109
    ·
    23 hours ago

    “Neutrality” is such a bullshit term. The point of juries is to be representative of the people’s moral sentiment, not to be a collection of morons who knows nothing about the world around them and safe unable to form opinions of their own.

    It simply seems like normal people think Luigi took out a very evil man.

    • TankieTanuki [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      They want the death penalty because a death-qualified jury means it’s going to have a bunch of reactionaries.

      A death qualified jury cannot have jurors on it that disagree with the death penalty morally.

      In practice, instead of being judged by your peers it’s a bunch of people selected so that they like harsh punishments.

      That’s what I learned when I posted my video to r/TrueAnon.

      • tocopherol [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I hadn’t thought of that really, that is fucked. Most reasonable people I know are opposed to the death penalty, so that does seem pretty effective for biasing the jury. But maybe they will get some that are like “of course I love the death penalty, that’s what Luigi doled out and it was well deserved. Not guilty.”

      • ClimateStalin [they/them, he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Ironically even given that, people are less likely to be convicted when the death penalty is on the table, because people feel bad sentencing someone to death, even if they agree with it.

    • Carl [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      21 hours ago

      If we took jury representation seriously, every jury would be a randomly-selected representative example of the population, jury duty would be remunerated very well and there would be stuff like childcare for jurors in place, hell you shouldn’t even need to spend gas to get to the courthouse the court should send a van to pick you up and feed you three hots while you’re there.

      Instead we’ve got a system where one of the best ways not to get picked is to show up to the court wearing glasses and reading a book while you’re waiting because lawyers will see that, assume you’re smart, and motion to get you removed from the jury pool.

  • indeed [they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    113
    ·
    23 hours ago

    sounds like it’s quite easy to find a neutral jury (hating insurance companies is a neutral opinion) but what they’re really trying to do is find a biased one

  • SpaceRanger13@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    23 hours ago

    You would think something impacting so many people negatively would be seen as an assault on all the citizens. If only we had less greedy ceos and shareholders making ludicrous amounts of money, and more people trying to make things better for everyone.