5 ms·
The first sentence of the cited article makes clear the matter at hand is not "elimination of jury trials" but "a plan to abolish some jury trials". The proposa
by glaucon 6mo ago
The first sentence of the cited article makes clear the matter at hand is not "elimination of jury trials" but "a plan to abolish some jury trials". The proposal is an attempt to reduce the time which those who are accused must wait for trial.
FWIW the majority of all criminal cases in the UK are dealt with by either a single judge, or three judges[1]. This is hardly surprising as assembling a jury is vastly time consuming and for minor criminal matters is hard to justify.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_offence#United_Kingdom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_offence#United_Kingdom
- cryptonector 6mo agoAny charge that can be punished with imprisonment should require a jury trial.
- penguin_booze 6mo agoJury trials are a colossal and disproportionate waste of time. Jury trials have it place, but most of the time is spent on jury selection, theatrics, and deliberation--all this cost dearly, both in terms of time and money. Thanks to its high cost and unpredictability, laughable inventions like "plea bargains" exist, only to selectively prey on the vulnerable. It's not perfect (nor are jury trials), but when it comes to truth discovery and arriving at a proportionate sentence, as long as all parties are fairly represented, one without jury trials should be just as effective.
- AndrewDucker 6mo agoUK trials don't spend lots of time on jury selection. And there's rarely days of deliberation. Not everything is done in US style.