Sorry immartian said he'd vote and take is chances, and i asked "for your family as well" not a proper quote head yet
Sorry immartian said he'd vote and take is chances, and i asked "for your family as well" not a proper quote head yet
I
imamartian
Sorry immartian said he'd vote and take is chances, and i asked "for your family as well" not a proper quote head yet
aren't we using the English version of DIYnot tonight?
I
imamartian
ok... my point is.... increase the number of people in the jury, maybe do it via the internet, but a 1000 people rules out 7 of the 12 people in a jury being swayed...
and we all vote for it and agree and we all then stand by it !!!
i would....
as for my family, yes, we're all good and honest and my kids have been brought up well.... as i said, i'd take my chances...
and we all vote for it and agree and we all then stand by it !!!
i would....
as for my family, yes, we're all good and honest and my kids have been brought up well.... as i said, i'd take my chances...
I
imamartian
it was an irrelavent question.... the point is 12 is not enough, 1000 can't be swayed...
have you asked how long 12 people take to make their decision? that can be a long time too!! 
have you asked how long 12 people take to make their decision?
that can be a long time too!!
C
cantaloup63
So your kid is found guilty by 997 to 3 and one the back of this (s)he swings fro the gallows? Are you sure about you happy compliance?
I
imamartian
So your kid is found guilty by 997 to 3 and one the back of this (s)he swings fro the gallows? Are you sure about you happy compliance?
my english filter isn't working tonight i'm afraid!!!!
Sorry immartian said he'd vote and take is chances, and i asked "for your family as well" not a proper quote head yet
aren't we using the English version of DIYnot tonight?
Did you understand it?
C
cantaloup63
Technically it could. In fact Simon Cowell could make an ongoing TV series called the Ex factor and get people to vote.
I
imamartian
I know that you mean well Trigger, but 1000 jurors isn't practical is it?
Have you ever done jury service?have you asked how long 12 people take to make their decision?
this is the modern world gasman... 1000 is easily done...
please don't patronise me either.
and no i haven't done jury service, but my dad has....
So you propose increasing the jury by a massive amount and think that asking what effect that would have on deliberation time is irrelevant on the grounds that 12 can take a long time too? You are an idiot.
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 3,624
- Reaction score
- 667
- Country
I did not fight in WW2, but my Grandfather did. Wheres the relevence?
C
cantaloup63
Thinks that it's worth watching the movie "12 good men" once again to see how a jury evolves in life and death decisions.
That's why I'm persuaded against the death penalty, and also against millenial jurors
That's why I'm persuaded against the death penalty, and also against millenial jurors
So, you honestly think it's practical to be able to have 1000 people on a jury? Whether in person or remote, internet etc.
- Joined
- 26 Sep 2008
- Messages
- 3,005
- Reaction score
- 518
- Country
Pragmatically not realistic, unless you have 1000 on the internet. Even that can be nobbled.
Not patronising, just trying to put a sense of humour into things - you do remember humour don't you Trigger?
Well, that makes everything OK then - as long as your Dad has taken the time, effort and trouble to tell you the ins and outs of life on jury service, that makes everything OK. When and if you get called up, please tell us your thoughts on the subject. I have served twice, many years apart, but have the sagacity to offer a reasoned retort.