Should American Jurors be I.Q tested before....

[ghostwriter]

Does anyone think that America should test its jurors I.Q. before they are allowed to serve in Court???



I am not totally sure how they pick these jurors but where are they getting these ignorant fools.

Were all the jurors Jackson thriller fans!

The Man paid a family 10 years ago 15million american dollars to hide the fact that he raped a boy. These idiot jurors say there was not enough evidence... does there have to be a tape of him having sex with a child... I bet if there was they would have still said he was innocent!

[EMIZZZZAGREB]

I told you months ago, that he would be found not guilty and you said I was wrong, in your usual style.
I hope Jackson’s camps are not scanning the internet for such libelous claims, because the owners of this site and you would be in very big trouble for your remark.

Nothing better than an anonymous kangaroo court, well remember you’re not anonymous on the internet and comments like that can land you in a lot of trouble, especially given the elevated position of this site on google, I know you will just laugh this off.

[gw]

Do you think I am afraid of the Jacksons....


My family relative did the P.I work for that piece of crap!

My relative is also a piece of crap for working for that molester.

[croam]

i don't think anyone has to worry about being sued for libel seeing he was accused of being a molester, this is a very niche based site...doesn't reach that many people...and he's repeating what others have said.

Ghost: I agree that he's most likely a pederas....BUT, the prosecution lost this case. The mother of the accuser was clearly a grifter, the jury felt she ruined the prosecutions case. He may not even have been guilty of that accusation, but I knew when i saw him say on that documentary, i was watching it live two years ago, that he is finished when he said "sleeping with children is beautiful". I knew he was done. The fact that he thinks that is sick enough...but the accuser and his mom are total grifter con artist liars as well. Also, money bought him the best lawyers available and he got off. They didn't even convict him of the minor charge of corrupting a minor with alcohol...which doesn't take that much evidence. Wrong case to nail him on what he most likely had been guilty of in the past in other situations.
Our jury system works quite well usually. Both sides thoroughly screened, selected, and agreed on the jurors. The prosecution wasn't effective enough and they lost. I'm sure he's already landed in Bucharest to find some young boys if indeed the jackson team is monitoring this site for anti-jacko sentiment as EMIZ stated.

[rzombie007]

Ghostwriter, hello there. In response to the juror IQ question you had. All citizens here in the US are required by law to appear before the court when sent a "juror request". It doesn't matter what the educational background one has. Let's say (15) people are requested, only (10) will be selected for a "trial by jury". The attorney's ask several questions to the (15), it serves as kind of an "interview", if you will. Once the (10) people are chosen, these (10) people will therefore decide the fate of the "defendant".

In such a high profile case such as "MJ", jurors were scared to death(literally) to prosecute a celebrity. What we heard was that they were contacted and threatened if they said "guilty". I hope that answers your question. And "yes" there are A LOT of stupid people here. We call them "rednecks". You can go onto "youtube" and look up rednecks. They need to go to Mexico!!!

[mambo]

It is not just the jurors where things go wrong. If you read some of the cases 'the innocence project' has picked up you wonder if you are reading about a court case in Iran, but no, these are actual court cases in the US.

The biggest problem in the US is that you can buy your verdict. Not so much because you can buy the judges, but because you can pay the lawyers who are able to get their clients off.........only because they are much more clever than the jurors.

In the OJ Simpson case it was clear that he committed the murders. The prosecution first screwed up and Johnny Cochran was there to finish it off. Barry Sheck showed up with a beautiful performance on police work with regard to DNA and all the jurors were simply overwhelmed..............they let him walk.

And then of course you have all the frivolous law suits with only one goal in mind..........get as much money as you can. Make up a nice story and a jury will give you millions of dollars.

The jury system was perhaps once a system of 'justice by your peers', but those days are gone. A defendant deserves a decent court case and not a roulette game.
And ladies and gentlemen..............is the defendant guilty ?
Well.................we are sorry, he could not afford a good lawyer who can twist the minds of the jury, so he is guilty !!!

[kesterj]

Sadly, I fear much of what Mambo says is true. Yet I would still prefer the jury system to the continental systen where the judge is also the jury,

I think the continental system (which I assume includes Croatia) is seriously flawed because you have people studying to be judges only, without ever having fought out themselves on the court flaw. It means judges can sit there aged from about 24 or 25 - judging (supposedly) in front of very very experienced lawyers who can act out the had done by better than Steve McQueen and Meryl Streep.


Cmmon, anyone can see this is a recipe for disaster - if, that is, you consider justice to be important.

But i also see that the jury system has serious flaws, because of 'psychological' intimidation by lawyers and public pressure.

What it really needs as a minimum in hig profile cases is clear direction by judges. It doesn't matter if you are a fan of Star Star Bloggs, if said Star Star Bloggs has (let's say) run over a child through dangerous driving, or when drunk and drugged, think of the situation as if it were your child.

Star Star Bloggs should be given the same rights as Joe Bloggs; is the evidence so strong as to
convict Joe Bloggs, then it should also convict Star Star Bloggs.

Equally, if you would not convict Joe, you should not convict Star Star.

Or your child could be the next victim of injustice.

Or you; or me.


kesterj

[mambo]

Kesterj,

It does not need to be like that. In Holland there are two ways to become a judge:

1. Finish your standard law studies and subsequently enter the study to become a judge (another 6 years of studying).

or

2. Finish your law studies, work in the judicial field for at least 6 years and then enter the study to become judge, in which case it will only be 4 years.

Judges in Holland are jduge for life (until they become 70 they can keep working) and are fully independent from the government, from the prosecutors or from the lawyers. They are only responsible to themselves, not to anyone else.

Here in Croatia the judges are simply an extension of the government and of the police, which has nothing to do with an independent judicial system

When I then read that next year the EU wants to close the negotiations for entering the EU it means that next year the whole judicial system has to be overhauled I already know how it will end.
Next year it will still be the same, the EU will say: Ok, if you promise you will do it in the future we will accept it and you will be allowed to enter the EU.
Obviously, once in the EU there is no need anymore to reform the judicial system and thus nothing will ever change.

It is sad that the EU is lowering its standards so much, it is a disgrace and it is the main reason why project EU will fail.
Lowering your standards in order to allow applicants to become a member is the sure way to a failure, but apparently the EU does not want to keep up the standards.

[Ribaric]

Quoting from Mambo....

When I then read that next year the EU wants to close the negotiations for entering the EU it means that next year the whole judicial system has to be overhauled I already know how it will end.
Next year it will still be the same, the EU will say: Ok, if you promise you will do it in the future we will accept it and you will be allowed to enter the EU.
Obviously, once in the EU there is no need anymore to reform the judicial system and thus nothing will ever change.

If this happens, it should cue a revolution on the streets of the EU. We all have the responsibility to protect the freedoms and the institutions of real democracies. Some of us have/had parents who fought wars against despots, large and small, if we let the modern versions of Adolf bring their poison into the free world then we will all re-live the history we should never have forgotten.

[mambo]

Ribaric,

Have to disappoint you because the EU already had that approach with Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Estland, Letland etc.

None of these countries really complied with all the requirements of the EU, they only made promises they would change and the EU accepted it.
Now the EU politicians slowly start to realize that these countries will never change. They are now punishing Bulgaria and Romania by halting subsidies, but also this will pass.

It is the main reason why I say the EU is already dead. They have lowered the standards and this will create a lot of anger with the states which comply, so in the end (probably in 20 years) we will see a new European organization arising, perhaps called the EU of Northern EU states.

[3lions]

Oct 3, 2009 1:02:33 GMT 1 mambo said:

Kesterj,

It does not need to be like that. In Holland there are two ways to become a judge:

1. Finish your standard law studies and subsequently enter the study to become a judge (another 6 years of studying).

or

2. Finish your law studies, work in the judicial field for at least 6 years and then enter the study to become judge, in which case it will only be 4 years.

Judges in Holland are jduge for life (until they become 70 they can keep working) and are fully independent from the government, from the prosecutors or from the lawyers. They are only responsible to themselves, not to anyone else.

Here in Croatia the judges are simply an extension of the government and of the police, which has nothing to do with an independent judicial system

When I then read that next year the EU wants to close the negotiations for entering the EU it means that next year the whole judicial system has to be overhauled I already know how it will end.
Next year it will still be the same, the EU will say: Ok, if you promise you will do it in the future we will accept it and you will be allowed to enter the EU.
Obviously, once in the EU there is no need anymore to reform the judicial system and thus nothing will ever change.

It is sad that the EU is lowering its standards so much, it is a disgrace and it is the main reason why project EU will fail.
Lowering your standards in order to allow applicants to become a member is the sure way to failure, but apparently the EU does not want to keep up the standards.

....well I am not sure if judges are an extension of the government in Croatia. That would mean that they could be tied down to something, and really they can't.