Hacker News Reader

Comment by richeyrw | Hacker News Reader

I remember reading somewhere that everyone should always demand a jury trial as an act of non-violent protest. Currently, as I recall, only 5% of eligible cases go to juries. So obviously if everyone did it (or even if it only went to 10% or 15%) it would bring the criminal justice system to a screeching halt.

As I recall it was aimed at the War on Drugs, but as this article points out, unintended consequences have bleed out all over the justice system like the death scene in a B-movie.

View on HN

Prisoner's Dilemma, though -- if you're the only guy who participates, you end up worse off. It would take a reasonably large number to tip, and you get progressively worse off until a critical value is reached, as your trial will be delayed more.

I can't help thinking the payoffs ought not to be in Prisoners' Dilemma form though; i.e. there should be a realistic chance a defendant facing a mandatory minimum sentence most juries would consider excessive might expect to be acquitted by jury nullification.

I read about that idea, too, and it looks like an interesting way to protest. But it's also a rather expensive way to protest. Jury trials take many months (during which you may be unable to do anything productive) as well as many hours (that your lawyer bills you for). They will take even longer if the criminal justice system actually grinds to a "screeching halt" as intended. Few people can afford such an expensive method of protest.

If it all happened at once, no one would pay. The system would stop, and government would have to act. Part of the deal of government acting would be all those defendants with drawing from the jury trial.

Of course, there is always a chance that the US government would declare requesting a jury trial as an act of terror...

Why would the government have to act, simply because the system stopped? I'd assume that they'd just tell everyone, "Okay, your jury trial is on March 19th, 2843. We'll be holding you without bail until then."

There's no reason to declare requesting a jury trial a terrorist act if they can already hold everyone indefinitely.

While it's not foolproof, in the US, you do have a right to a "speedy trial".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedy_Trial_Clause

> While it's not foolproof,

I hereby nominated you for "Understatement of the Year".

Constitutional protection in the US is gone, full stop, and has been for a long time. The document is purely historical and "cultural", in that it does inform public opinion, but does not, in any way, constrain the government -- it's actual purpose.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com