[speaker001:] well
[speaker002:] so uh what do you think about uh uh how trials in America are right now with the jury of nine or twelve do you think that's fair
[speaker001:] well um I believe a trial by twelve uh peers is fair I don't think the need for a unanimous vote is fair
[speaker002:] um-hum
[speaker001:] nothing in our world seems to be by unanimous vote
[speaker002:] uh-huh
[speaker001:] except that hm we're too uh diverse a cultures I believe to make a complete agreement
[speaker002:] um-hum so you think that um majority rule majority rule is good enough for um deciding on a verdict of guilty or not guilty
[speaker001:] I do
[speaker002:] um-hum
[speaker001:] I really do
[speaker002:] um something that's kind of interesting is uh I lived in Europe for a while and um in Germany they don't have trial by jury they have trial uh by usually three judges  and uh I've discussed with people and it's it's kind of interesting uh kind of an interesting concept it sounds strange at first not to have a jury by your peers but then um the argument for it is that um you know people off the street really don't know much about law
[speaker001:] I agree with that
[speaker002:] and yeah and and then uh I guess the argument is that they're easily influenced you know by by tricks by lawyers you know who dos do more psychology than trying to teach them what's right and wrong and the law they they use uh you know techniques to sway their feelings whereas professional judges um you know know the ins and outs of the system better
[speaker001:] I agree I think that's very true I'm um concerned that when we uh sentence a uh a criminal to for a certain amount of years that we don't really know what that means
[speaker002:] um-hum
[speaker001:] you know ten years may mean one year in reality
[speaker002:] right
[speaker001:] and I don't think that most people are aware of that
[speaker002:] um-hum
[speaker001:] you know I I wouldn't couldn't tell you if we sentenced someone tomorrow how long he'd actually be in jail
[speaker002:] uh-huh
[speaker001:] could you
[speaker002:] no
[speaker001:] me either
[speaker002:] no couldn't
[speaker001:] and I think they kind of depend on that these criminals
[speaker002:] right yeah definitely I don't know I think the that the um alternative is something interesting to look into uh
[speaker001:] but it
[speaker002:] if you you know instead of instead of juries just by by uh uh peers juries by professional judges
[speaker001:] um-hum
[speaker002:] um but I guess uh that would take a major constitutional change here
[speaker001:] definitely would but I see where they would be experts
[speaker002:] right um I mean I see also how they were you know when they made the constitution they were uh afraid of that kind of thing that you know that um if the
[speaker001:] um
[speaker002:] government has all the power to decide who's guilty and who's not they wanted to make checks and balances against that
[speaker001:] right it could really throw the checks and balances out of whack what if one of them is corrupt
[speaker002:] right exactly
[speaker001:] and he is the the decision the the main decision maker
[speaker002:] right
[speaker001:] you know the the they're split either way
[speaker002:] yeah it's uh does carry an implicit danger with it that way
[speaker001:] it does but that's kind of goes like our Supreme Court in a way
[speaker002:] right that's true too you know how does how does that work
[speaker001:] and who gets to point those people the politicians
[speaker002:] right
[speaker001:] so they get to make the decision not the people
[speaker002:] exactly I think it was I think it was more of a danger you know in the seventeen hundreds when um really you know like the King of England could decide who's guilty and who's not guilty I could see how they would wanna protect against that so I think the danger is less today would be less of a risk of you know uh corrupt judges and the government forcing
[speaker001:] um-hum
[speaker002:] uh you know someone to to be guilty for uh even though they're not or vice versa you know um but it's definitely something that would have to be watched very closely if they decided to do it that way
[speaker001:] that's true I think a good start would be maybe some uh simple basic education into how the process really works for children
[speaker002:] exactly um-hum
[speaker001:] on up I mean I know I know that we all learned but I really don't see it where the children are learning it nowadays
[speaker002:] right
[speaker001:] they think it's a big game and you know
[speaker002:] right and and um you know what what does jury duty mean not not many people really
[speaker001:] are are you willing to take off from work and lose a day's pay or a week's pay
[speaker002:] uh-huh
[speaker001:] is your boss willing to let you
[speaker002:] right that's that's a really interesting issue too and um you know most people
[speaker001:] yeah
[speaker002:] another interesting thing is you know most most most people try and get out of jury duty right
[speaker001:] oh definitely
[speaker002:] so the people that actually become juries are it's not really just a random sampling of the