Hacker News Reader

Thought experiment: You are a juror in a case where a minor is accused of small-time theft, some cans of Coke. There is video evidence, clearly they stole. In the two cases

- the punishment is a small fine

- the punishment is the amputation of both hands

does your verdict depend on the expected punishment?

View on HN

I'm unclear on why you're asking. You're written the question to presuppose an answer, but I'm not clear on the point you're making. It doesn't seem germane to my comment above.

Isn't the reason obvious? You said the jury is supposed to lack domain knowledge. Domain knowledge apparently includes knowing the possible sentence. The given example is a case where knowing the possible sentence would alter the verdict given by any reasonable person. Therefore the jury should have knowledge of the possible sentence. What is unclear about that?

That it is humane and morally correct to not follow the rules of justice in some cases, one of those being excessive punishment. I believe that this was the motivation in the subject trial -- I would have acted in the same way. In the UK this is a "perverse verdict", judges and government don't like them, but there's not much they can do about it except restrict trial by jury (which is exactly what the UK government is planning to do).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com