That's a very good point.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Create the jury of your peers
- Thread starter Shaul
- Start date
That's a very good point.
Eek! Would I be better off just pleading guilty as charged?
Of course, if you really are guilty you can count on Trump to pardon you these days.
I feel like I’d want @Sunstone because they seem very honest and strive for intellectual honesty.
@Left Coast because I think they value justice. @Rival seems like a good pick to have on your team @SalixIncendium because I think we share somewhat the same sense of ethics. Sort of hehe
@Debater Slayer because I mean it’s all in the name, right? They’d slay in any debate.
@ChristineM Never hurts to have a friendly skull on your side
I’d have @Revoltingest just to spice things up and watch him throw haggis at everyone
I’m sure I’ve missed some, since I am still recovering from Christmas my poor head lol
@Left Coast because I think they value justice. @Rival seems like a good pick to have on your team @SalixIncendium because I think we share somewhat the same sense of ethics. Sort of hehe
@Debater Slayer because I mean it’s all in the name, right? They’d slay in any debate.
@ChristineM Never hurts to have a friendly skull on your side
I’d have @Revoltingest just to spice things up and watch him throw haggis at everyone
I’m sure I’ve missed some, since I am still recovering from Christmas
my poor head lol
Last edited:
Heyo
Veteran Member
... or your death sentence be hushed.
Heyo
Veteran Member
I don't know if I could name 12, let's see.
I make the assumption that it is a complicated case. There is no much importance in a jury in an open-and-shut case. Therefore not only honesty and impartiality are tantamount but also the ability to understand what's going on.
@Polymath257,
@ChristineM,
@exchemist,
@Subduction Zone are clearly on the brighter side.
@Rival,
@adrian009,
@Harel13,
@lewisnotmiller are on the staff for a reason. They seem to always be able to see both sides of a coin, even when they argue for one.
@Sunstone may not have all the answers but has always the best questions - and the ability to listen to the answers.
@blü 2 seems wise to me.
@sun rise is also impartial as far as I can see.
11? Close enough, may as well throw in @Revoltingest as comic relief.
I'm pretty sure to get a fair punishment with these if I'm guilty.
Edit: On second thought, @Evangelicalhumanist may be a better choice as 12th juror. Better take justice serious.
Last edited:
It'd be a crowded courthouse if I got to select my jury;
@Polymath257
@Left Coast
@Sunstone
@Evangelicalhumanist
@blü 2
@adrian009
@Subduction Zone
@LuisDantas
@metis
@Vouthon
@sun rise
@Dan From Smithville
Excluded would be anyone who thinks I'm guilty cause I'm not part of and or critique their religions.
I reckon I'd still end up charged but at least it would be by an impartial jury
@Polymath257
@Left Coast
@Sunstone
@Evangelicalhumanist
@blü 2
@adrian009
@Subduction Zone
@LuisDantas
@metis
@Vouthon
@sun rise
@Dan From Smithville
Excluded would be anyone who thinks I'm guilty cause I'm not part of and or critique their religions.
I reckon I'd still end up charged but at least it would be by an impartial jury
Well, I do try to be intellectually honest. That's true enough. But on the other hand, I am a natural born screw up who creates a mess of nearly everything I set out to do -- so you might want to take that into account, as well.
Defense lawyers have told me that bench trials are best when your goal is to get off on a legal technicality, while jury trials should be preferred when you have a case that lends itself to an emotional defense.
Also, my uncle (who began his career as a defense attorney), used to say that whenever the outcome of a trial would likely hinge on the testimony of a police officer, he would make certain to get as many Black people on the jury as possible because Blacks almost always have firsthand experience of being lied to, or lied about, by police officers.
He was a Republican, by the way. His packing juries with Blacks had nothing to do with politics, but was simply a calculated move to defend his clients.
A law professor I know explained it thus....
if you're guilty: Jury trial cuz of more emotion & prejudice.
If innocent: Bench trial cuz more about evidence, argument, & law.
Of course, trials are always a crapshoot. I've seen wrongful
behavior in them all....lawyers, prosecutors, judges, juries.
You might regret it.I feel like I’d want @Sunstone because they seem very honest and strive for intellectual honesty.
@Left Coast because I think they value justice. @Rival seems like a good pick to have on your team @SalixIncendium because I think we share somewhat the same sense of ethics. Sort of hehe
@Debater Slayer because I mean it’s all in the name, right? They’d slay in any debate.
@ChristineM Never hurts to have a friendly skull on your side
I’d have @Revoltingest just to spice things up and watch him throw haggis at everyone
I’m sure I’ve missed some, since I am still recovering from Christmas
The one time I was jury foreman, no one elected me or even
agreed to it. It was a 1-person coup made necessary to
find the guy not guilty (no case against him) & get the Heck
out of there. Too many women wanted a conviction because
he was "scary looking".
How I picked jurors....
- Sympathetic to jury nullification, ie, not guilty by reason of bad law.
- Lacking hostilities
- Open minded even when disagreeing
- Decent judgement
- And one brain damaged jerk from Canuckistan
The appearance of political & religious diversity just happened.
- Sympathetic to jury nullification, ie, not guilty by reason of bad law.
- Lacking hostilities
- Open minded even when disagreeing
- Decent judgement
- And one brain damaged jerk from Canuckistan
The appearance of political & religious diversity just happened.
Last edited:
Secret Chief
nirvana is samsara
Fall down six times, get up seven.Eek! Would I be better off just pleading guilty as charged?
Yes! I broke the 5th precept against intoxicants! I admit it, I did brush the fruitcake I just baked with booze! Will I do it again? Probably.
That's like trusting cops to be judge, jury, & executioner.
Ooo Rev don't tempt me now!
What is it with staff always requesting erotic discipline!
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
The US Constitution's 6th Amendment doesn't even mention peers.It would be impossible. I am without peers!
Just pick who ya want.