Tuesday Two

THIS WEEK'S TOPIC: THE COURTROOM

QUESTION A: Do you believe the current "jury of one's peers" system is the right way to go, or should local citizens be elected or appointed to serve as "professional jurors" to hear criminal cases, and why.

or

QUESTION B: If a simple, painless and foolproof "lie detector" system could be developed that could be applied to the accused in criminal cases, removing the possibility that an innocent person could possibly be convicted, would you be in favor of that system being used universally in all court cases to determine who is telling the truth, and why?

I'm going with Question A here. I think that if "professional jurors" were elected, the jury would be skewed. In my area here, the jury would probably be made up of ultra-conservative retirees. Considering that ultra-conservative retirees aren't really "peers" to those commiting crimes, I can see a big problem right off the bat.

Besides, I had to do jury duty once and it was an interesting way to spend a day. Even John Kerry enjoyed his day on a jury!