- qwertyman
- May 2, 2003
-
Congress gave me $3.1 trillion, which I already spent on extremely dangerous drugs. We had acid, cocaine, and a whole galaxy of uppers, downers, screamers, laughers, and amyls.
|
An easy solution would be to eliminate peremptory challenges for jurors. (Or limit it to like 1/side/case)
If a lawyer wants to strike someone, let them explain their cause, on the record.
If we wanted to get even more strict, we could have the lawyers conduct voir dire via written forms.
This would ensure that everyone gets asked the same questions, and there's no racial bias in how the answers are treated.
Beyond that, the government could pay jurors for missed wages, to minimize hardship exemptions from jury service.
I absolutely agree with this. I do not see the point of peremptory challenges when any venire person can be struck for cause. Peremptory challenges make it less likely that a juror a defendant or prosecutor faces will be a jury truly comprised of their peers.
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2015 12:02
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2024 15:59
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2015 12:02
