Hacker News Reader

Comment by pc86 | Hacker News Reader

FTA:

> The judge has already instructed us directly that we are not to do any research on the law while sitting on this jury. This is the first of several times I will violate those instructions.

Why do people do this? Why blatantly disregard the instructions of the judge when you're tasked with determining the guilt or innocence of someone and potentially sending them to jail, ruining their professional career, etc?

To completely ignore the instructions of a judge when tasked with something this important should have much more severe consequences than being dismissed and causing a mistrial.

View on HN

Honestly I can't imagine ever abiding by a rule like that. No outside research? So I'm just supposed to trust everything other jurors say and ignore facts and statistics? I think not. Juries are already horribly misinformed as it is (see: almost every case involving tech/computers) and to rule that no one can even attempt to educate themselves is quite frankly disgusting.

You are to take the case as presented by the prosecution, the case as presented by the defense, and rule one way or the other.

You are not, as someone with no legal training, no background in law or litigation, and no experience in the courtroom outside of being on a jury, supposed to start reading decades old case law and attempting to interpret it.

Lawyers are not paid $300 an hour because they've come up with a sweet gig, it's because the average person (yes, even the average software developer) does not have the context or experience to understand the finer points of the laws in question.

This assumes that both lawyers were of equal competence. The authors does not think so (other members of the jury didn't think so).

In the end, won't the jury have to interpret "case law"? How can you be presented something without interpreting it.

Yes you interpret it, as it is described and presented (in lay terms) by both the defense and prosecution, as filtered by an impartial judge.

And incompetent representation is grounds for an appeal. I'm not sure what exactly that has to do with the fact that John Doe off the street is probably not equipped to read primary source material on legal precedent and interpret it correct on his own.

There is also the question - Where does he source his research. Do his stats come from random internet sources, publications, for example...

The guy that wrote the article talks about doing "research" in one breath and then telling the judge something he heard from Law & Order in the next. I'm assuming people like him are the reason for the "no outside research" rule.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com