The following content is considered nonlegal and nonbinding OPINION only, and does not legally assume any entity is responsible for the accuracy of any facts that may seem to be presented by any entity. Rather this is meant to be a starting point of research into the facts or truth. The standard of the reasonable person should be assumed with regard to any possible research into the facts or truth!
A lazy jury will likely not bring about a responsible outcome. Instead they focus on what food to order if sequestered, children’s movies and ball games to watch, do not ask any questions and do not react to the evidence! Generally, they focus on their own comfort!
Jury selection has become big business and increasingly seeming to be corrupt and even movies are focusing on the process, problem, such as Runaway Jury.
There has been a trend in academia to question the process of jury selection and laws about the jury process suggesting it should be something of a strict lottery type process with mandatory participation without possible exemption from the process.
Deep research in often done by even the Justice Department on the selection of jury members partly to avoid a mistrial and the waste of time and other resources, especially due to too many jury members being excused and/or tampered with during the trial or seem to have delusional, or corrupt thought processes, which may be difficult to prove.
Jury duty is often not properly compensated and some fear for their life during the process or after the verdict, but some can change their worldview after the experience, and fee the need to accept more responsibility, even going from temporary work assignments to permanent job responsibility status.
Problem juries, problem local policy, and/or problem justice systems may have helped cause the Los Angeles Riots that may have resulted in more than $4 billion dollars in damages.
Juries seem often less willing to convict local community members, more willing to award large punitive or exemplary damages or to embrace political agendas often involving keeping assets, funds, programs in the local community.
Jury decisions can be interesting, entertaining, and thought-provoking and spark legislation attempting to limit the power of juries!
Researching the possible delusional, or corrupt thought or political thought processes of a jury may be a legitimate, important, valuable exercise, but perhaps it is the defendants the need to research their possible delusional, or corrupt thought or political thought processes and the overly concentrated power of lawmakers often beholden to the defendants.
Judges tend to fear questioning the fact finding done by juries or jury awards.
Juries may be very protective of community standards and resources.
Sequestering a jury likely will not prevent them from the influence of the media.
Juries may rarely favor so-called outsiders.
Jury bias may be near impossible to prove!
Jury instructions may be questioned or disputed.
Juries may be sequester; however a judge using the sequestering process to help use their power and discursion to suppress evidence or information known to the media, outsiders, or insiders may still discover the suppressed evidence and use their knowledge against the judge and defendants.
Appeals of a judicial decision tend to be time consuming and costly, but often the government or large entities can afford to post a bond or to surmount the appeal process.
Juries may be about empowering the larger community at the cost of a few powerful entities.
Juries tend to guard against political corruption, especially in the various branches of the government, often with the help of the media investigating a case. They will often protect against the corruption of foreign wealth and standards of corruption that happen in other communities that do not have their standards.
Juries tend to allow those with the most money to rule their community, and the various branches of government, and will even ignore the media and their investigations and publications.