Justice by Jury - another poppycock!

I just completed one-week stint as a juror in a civil case. I am now convinced that with a good lawyer you can get away with murder in this country! The concept of the fellow citizens determining ones guilt or innocence may sound great on paper. But in reality, it is a poor way of dispensing justice. Most of the people decide ones guilt or innocense, based on their ‘gut feel’. They do not have the capbility or patience to understand the implications of the rules of law. For example, the case before us jurors was that of an employee claiming compensation for the time she was sent home from work because her company could not accommodate her disability. The defense (company lawyer) never argued that she was not disabled. However, many in the jury did not believe that she was disabled, as they have heard stories of people misusing their disability benefits. Nobody knew about the Disabilities Act, which requires organizations to accommodate disabilities of employees unless they cause ‘undue hardship’. I think the case would have been won if the lawyer played on the emotions of the jurors (‘how would you feel if a company treated you like this?’), instead of submitting evidences of mistreatment of the employee. In criminal cases, the verdict has to be unanimous. This means that if a lawyer can plant a shred of doubt in a single juror, the defendant is going to be found innocent of charges. No wonder, ‘O.J.’ was let go. Instead of defending against DNA evidence, lawyer Johnny Cochran focused on the perceptions of the mostly Black jury, reminding them of the past injustices done to the Black people by the Los Angeles police. The trial of music director Phil Spector is in jury deliberations now. For many, this may look like an open and shut case with Mr. Spector even admitting, ‘I think I killed somebody!’. But I will not be surprised if the jury finds him not guilty, as he had excellent lawyers who argued that the victim had shot herself instead!