I don’t know about professional jurors. Wouldn’t they just add to the bureacracy and bring with them the inefficiency, waste, and sloth inherent in bureaucracies? The jurors dismissed were probably illegals. That happened the last time I was called. I admit it’s a pain in the ass, but I wouldn’t want my fate decided by a judge, either. That’s playing Russian roulette. Our judicial system is absolutely, positively broken, but I’m not sure what the solution is, other than start over from scratch with something else, and I don’t know what that something else would be.
No doubt, it is seriously broken. And it’s more than the problem of ‘activist judges’. The judicial system is becoming an enforcement agency for its own policies and edicts.
Here in AZ, the Supreme Court maintains the records on the Defensive Driving Program, and takes about $20 dollars out of each fee collected. That’s millions of dollars in just one year! With all the accounting tricks at their command, that money never gets returned to the people, who are the true victims of the driving offenses our laws are written to protect.
The Supreme Court, and every Superior Court below them, dictates how everything will be done within the courtroom, and by their design they reject the laws passed by the legislature or the people, because they think they know better what is right. The judges reject being held accountable for their decisions, while dictating what will happen because of them.
Our juvenile system is a mess. Offenders are treated as victims of societies mistakes; they’ve got ADD, ADHD, they’re Bi-polar and have abusive parents who smoke cigarettes. If the kids are confined, it’s not just because of their crimes, but just as likely because they are so messed up that they are a danger to themselves, so the state takes care of them.
Most of them are only acting up from lack of attention, and actually seem happy to see a familiar judge who will treat them with a respectful but firm hand. They understand having rules imposed, it just doesn’t happen outside of the court system; in other words, their parents are useless. And we know why that is, don’t we?
In regards to needing a jury to determine whether or not a convicted or admitted murderer deserve the death penalty, wouldn’t it have been simpler, and less costly, to refer that decision to a panel of judges? Three, or five, who would review the case and determine the severity of the sentence, in compliance with the laws? Doing it as it is now only prolongs the possiblity of the entire case being thrown out on some procedural technicality.
Zeppo007 on Feb 09
I don’t know about professional jurors. Wouldn’t they just add to the bureacracy and bring with them the inefficiency, waste, and sloth inherent in bureaucracies? The jurors dismissed were probably illegals. That happened the last time I was called. I admit it’s a pain in the ass, but I wouldn’t want my fate decided by a judge, either. That’s playing Russian roulette. Our judicial system is absolutely, positively broken, but I’m not sure what the solution is, other than start over from scratch with something else, and I don’t know what that something else would be.
marantAZ on Feb 15
No doubt, it is seriously broken. And it’s more than the problem of ‘activist judges’. The judicial system is becoming an enforcement agency for its own policies and edicts.
Here in AZ, the Supreme Court maintains the records on the Defensive Driving Program, and takes about $20 dollars out of each fee collected. That’s millions of dollars in just one year! With all the accounting tricks at their command, that money never gets returned to the people, who are the true victims of the driving offenses our laws are written to protect.
The Supreme Court, and every Superior Court below them, dictates how everything will be done within the courtroom, and by their design they reject the laws passed by the legislature or the people, because they think they know better what is right. The judges reject being held accountable for their decisions, while dictating what will happen because of them.
Our juvenile system is a mess. Offenders are treated as victims of societies mistakes; they’ve got ADD, ADHD, they’re Bi-polar and have abusive parents who smoke cigarettes. If the kids are confined, it’s not just because of their crimes, but just as likely because they are so messed up that they are a danger to themselves, so the state takes care of them.
Most of them are only acting up from lack of attention, and actually seem happy to see a familiar judge who will treat them with a respectful but firm hand. They understand having rules imposed, it just doesn’t happen outside of the court system; in other words, their parents are useless. And we know why that is, don’t we?
In regards to needing a jury to determine whether or not a convicted or admitted murderer deserve the death penalty, wouldn’t it have been simpler, and less costly, to refer that decision to a panel of judges? Three, or five, who would review the case and determine the severity of the sentence, in compliance with the laws? Doing it as it is now only prolongs the possiblity of the entire case being thrown out on some procedural technicality.