12 Angry Men

With current events roiling around Florida and the events that have led to the death of a young man, I suggest a Jury Forum.

With a Jury Forum, we can look at all the facts before making a determination. It can be a place where opinion actually takes a backseat and facts reign.

12 members can be picked for ATS "jury duty". A foreman elected. The facts presented. A determination made.

Save the rhetoric for the other forums. The heated exchanges that go on here can have the rest of the site.

The Jury forum can be an island of fact. Not opinion. Not feelings.

Thoughts?

I would just hope to never
have to leave my fate
in the hands of a ATS jury
the way people like to hang
others so fast WITHOUT a trial..

but ya i dig it

Originally posted by popsmayhem
I would just hope to never
have to leave my fate
in the hands of a ATS jury
the way people like to hang
others so fast WITHOUT a trial..

but ya i dig it

Thats why we need reason. Calm determintion. Save the rope for the mobs. We here have the potential to be so much better than the mob mentality that the media so gleefully manipulates.

possibly
I suggest we put the electric chair before the trial so there is no wining when the verdict goes against

Cheeky comment: I'm white so I'd be no good in the jury. Especially reguarding the events in Florida and also I'm English I'd rather sit with my tea n biscuits in my arm chair watching soap operas

Sorry mods if you wish to delete this feel free, I've just done a 9 hour night shift I'm feeling a bit fiesty

reply to post by beezzer


your thread title is wrong , 12 angry men dont look at facts - you should be looking for 12 rational men

but to be a wet blanket - ATS rarely gets all the facts , so opinions will still reign [ GIGO ]

further - ATS , or to be fair a large minority of it seems incapable of distinguishing claim from fact

specifically addressing ` police brutality ` threads - as helpfully they are the most blatant example

in most cases the claims of the alledged " victim " or edited out of context " evidence " are swallowed hook line and sinker , with no critical thinking what sove ever , while any police statement is dismissed as lies and coverup

and that wont change much - wether you have 12 or 12000 " reviewing " a case

reply to post by beezzer


Your idea sounds interesting, but it doesn't have to be a forum, does it?

It could be a moderated thread on a particular case.

Members can volunteer for the slots or be selected based upon some criteria.

I hope SO, Springer or the MODs give this one some thought.

I think it could be fascinating and fun.

I think they have enough ,the mods and owners,going on to have to deal with that would be impossible.
And to leave it up to the rest of us?
Why do you think they ran out of the drugs that they used for lethal injection?

reply to post by popsmayhem

I got a problem with your avatar.
1 question.
What do you know about that facts behind Zimmerman?

Sorry,I have seem to have gone off track.

On such topics, it could be a great idea!

I'd love to be on something like a jury, since we don't have it here.

I suppose you couldn't force members, or you'd have to leave a reasonable amount of time for a reply.

But ultimately - every jury needs a judge, so perhaps it should be one of the mods, and chosen by them?

But what does a jury do?
We see them in US television shows, and they sit and do nothing most of the time.

Potentially stressful for the jurors. Maybe they would deserve a title of Judge after the fact. Like the writer, fighter, scholar titles.

Since we wouldn't be allowed access to all of the evidence, we would need to make provision for implied evidence. Labelled as such.

I wouldn't mind it would seem interesting. I don't know Bee just PM 12 people whom you think are up to par for this.

reply to post by Semicollegiate

Well, once in court the media does present evidence, and wouldn't the public see most of what the jury gets to see?
So I'm not sure of "implied evidence".
Perhaps one could rather suggest "indirect evidence"?

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
..... just PM 12 people whom you think are up to par for this.

Agree.

Would make things interesting around here,actually.

Great Novel , had a hard time due to language but otherwise aced it.

Where will you find 12 impartial members that have all the facts?

Having recently performed the duty of Jury Service, after being randomly selected from the electoral register, I would posit that ATS is not the best forum for such a construct to spawn in. For one thing, contrary to the way they are portrayed in a courtroom drama, or other theatrical setting, juries are made up of normal people, and these normal people have the ammusing habit of being able to justify slipping prejudice and personal feelings into thier deliberations, and allow these things to affect the outcome of cases.

I was forever having to remind other jury members that our task was not to assess the character of a given witness or defendant, but to assess the EVIDENCE, and decide, wether on its merits alone, the case on which we were working, would turn out with a guilty or a not guilty verdict.

Now, because I have a rudimentary understanding of science, and psychology, and the ability to follow instructions, I was able to contribute to the deliberations, and prevent others from misinterpreting the brief set before us. If I had not been there, if no one in that group of twelve had the ability to cut through the personal preferences, prejudices, insecurities and ignorance of that group, then an innocent man would have been sent to jail, of that I have no doubt.

ATS is a place with a much better group of thinkers than you get in mainstream society, but that does not prevent the enormous intellects on this site from being on occasion stubborn, obsfucatory, and biased. If anything, the focus that some of us put into being firmly on one side of a given fence means that there are those of us who would be utterly unfit to examine anything with a totaly evidence based eye. Even if reasonable members were to be in the mix for the proposed jury, the fanatical attitudes expressed by some members on some topics, would mean that any proposed jury would be out until the middle of the next millenium.

I think that it is an interesting idea for either a forum or a thread format. A problem is that it seems to be rather rare that the facts are all available for the public to use in making a fully informed judgment. It would definitely be interesting to see what was decided based on the facts that are available, though.

I don't know what you had in mind for criteria to choose participants, either. That could get sticky with some feeling neglected, especially if they are particularly interested in participating, if they aren't chosen. I would hate to see it turn into a popularity contest for only well known members or people who are prolific posters. I know that I don't post a lot, preferring to read or finding that what I would post has already been expressed and not wanting to just echo what others have said, so I end up not posting just for the sake of seeing my own words. However, that means that I'm not known to anyone here and would be unlikely to be chosen to participate in something like this jury. I would enjoy it, as it sounds like something that would be intellectually stimulating. I'm not sure how to get around having people wanting to participate and not being chosen and then feeling hurt or left out or having it seen as a popularity contest.

Beyond those concerns, it sounds like a really intriguing idea and I would love to see it happen. This is a great idea.

Take care,
Cindi

Great movie...

And actually not a bad idea OP.

Would be an interesting read.


As a side note, I've actually done dury duty, about 11 years ago.

Was quite an experience actually.

Originally posted by zorgon
Where will you find 12 impartial members that have all the facts?

As in a real trial by jury, they should only be able to take into consideration what has been brought into evidence by the counsel, ie the OP on a thread.

Or perhaps an even better idea would be a mock trial, where in addition to our 12 jurors, there are also 2 counselors and a judge (mod or mod appointed)

Example:
Zorgon presents evidence that UFO's landed on White House lawn last night and delivered intergalactic Dominos to the secret service in 30 minutes or less.

Beezer presents evidence to the contrary.

The judge in the case determines which info is allowable and within the scope, and then once the two sides are finished presenting each case, it is handed t the jury who have an allotted amount f time, say 7 days, to determine a verdict on whether or not it is true that there is in fact an intergalactic Dominos, that can reach earth in 30 minutes or less, and in fact did land on the white house lawn to deliver to the secret service.

I like it...if not a forum perhaps a nice little interactive game that ATS can host. Like the debate forum