Few people even wonder why we have juries. If they did question the jury system, they might come to the conclusion that the jury system is not a good idea. Are juries better at finding the truth than the police? The police find the truth for a living and are no doubt better at it than the average person. Prosecutors and judges study the law and see people under stress, see the process over and over and are probably better at finding the truth than the average person. Why then should we trust the average person over the police, prosecutors, and judges?

We use the jury system not because it is better at finding the truth. It is not. We use the jury system because the police, prosecutors, and judges have a vested interest in protecting the interests of their employer. They have a conflict of interest. This goes against the grain of what most people are taught, but ask yourself who hires, pays and controls the police? Prosecutors and judges are either elected or appointed and are therefore beholden either to the majority who elected them or the government that appoints them and not to all of the community or to justice itself. It may seem and most of the time may be true, that there is no conflict, but who is to decide? Where is the protection against the conflict of interest, if the people with the conflict are the ones who decide?

Whereas, if juries are properly selected, they are chosen at random and the only vested interest they would likely have is to maintain and promote justice in their community. To overcome the prejudices of the police, prosecutors, and judges, in all criminal cases the juries must judge the whole case: the facts, the evidence, the law, the justice of the law to the case at hand, and must be able to place limits on penalties. Juries could stand as a shield against the conflicts of interest that are held by police, prosecutors, judges, and the legislatures. If juries refuse to allow injustice, they shield our rights.

Without a true trial by jury even the Constitution or State Constitutions offers no real protection of our rights. The House, Senate, The President, the Courts, the States, and local governments are all often or always in cahoots to violate our rights.

For a spirited defense of the jury system I urge that you acquire and read the Trial by Jury in the Lysander Spooner Reader available at amazon.com (click here).

The advantage of the jury system is that we do not need to persuade a large percentage of the people to be affective. One person in twelve on a jury if they vote their conscience can hold off injustice. One person in twelve is 8.34%: The 8.34% solution.

Now the question is, is there anything we can do about this? A group called The Fully Informed Jury Amendment started the work that is needed. I suggest two strategies. One is to organize state constitutional amendments where we can. Two is to pass out literature on the rights and duties of juries to people who are called to jury duty. We will need to use the principles of profit and "good deeds." If you want to join up in this cause please contact me (click here).