[Publius Valerius]

each of us can individually decide which way to vote in any way we see fit, even if it’s because you don’t like the guys heairstyle. It’s really only common sense.

You are that cavalier with the concept of due process? Liberty weeps.

There was a case some time ago where the jury convicted based on a coin flip. The jury said that since they all agreed on the coin flip, they thought it would be fine. Instead, there was a mistrial and the guy was retried. Good use of tax money there.

[bvw]

Geesh, Robroy is right, and you’re right too, but not that he was wrong. A coin flip is a mistrial. Common sense.

[RobRoy]

>>You are that cavalier with the concept of due process? Liberty weeps.<<

No, not really. I am not stating what jurys should do. I am stating what jurors legally CAN do. I was not so cavalier when on juries. Rather, I knew the judge to be merely a man, as myself, and used my own good judgement, coupled with the facts at hand, to come to my own personal decision regarding a verdict.

I should point out that both cases I sat on were civil, i.e. lawsuits. I’m a very black and white thinker. If I thought it was worth the time and effort to get the education, I think I would have been an excellent judge. Part of the reason for that, also, is my ability to “ego free” change my position as more evidence avails itself. It’s almost like a game.

[RobRoy]

>>There was a case some time ago where the jury convicted based on a coin flip.<<

Here is the difference, and I see it as “black and white”: When an individual juror votes, his vote is not scrutinized, other than to ask him if it is his vote. The reasoning is INTERNAL and, therefore, secret. When an entire jury flips a coin, it is not individual, nor secret. It is an utterly completely different thing that only appears, on the surface, to be similar.