Is an Impartial Jury Possible?
| The Introduction |
“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district”
– Amendment 6, U.S. Constitution.
In real life, the idea of a jury of your peers determining the facts serves as one of the vital parts of our judicial system; the government isn’t determining the facts, your fellow citizens are. This involvement in our judicial proceedings serves to legitimize all punishments handed out to criminals, and makes it so that us citizens of the United States can respect rulings and not use anarchy as a substitute.
Unfortunately, the theory of an “Impartial jury” merely serves as an oxymoron on ROBLOX; No one can guarantee that a jury on ROBLOX is unbiased. It is incredibly implausible, if not impossible, to make sure all jury members will possess the intellectual capability, maturity, and impartiality to determine the facts of a case that decides on the freedom of a citizen and the rule of law of our nation.
It can be argued that the existence of the jury system in the nUSA criminal courts serves as a primary deterrent in cases being handled in the first place. The amount of logistics it takes to handle a jury case even on ROBLOX is insane; many judges will simply focus on cases that have been declared bench trials in order to avoid the nightmare of handling complicated situations such as juries.
| The Ethical Nightmare |
“The bedrock of our democracy is the rule of law” – Caroline Kennedy.
Without justice and the rule of law, our government is useless. If the guilty can’t face justice and the innocent are in fear of false punishment, our system will simply collapse into either anarchy or into a new system.
The introduction explained the problem well; we can’t guarantee the impartiality of juries on a video game for minors. What kind of punishment do we give to children who fail in their roles as jurors, 2 weeks of virtual jail that have no implications on your real life? In real life, a juror being dishonest results in actual harm to your own life, so you’re much more obligated to actually being honest on your reviewing of the facts. In addition, in real life you can’t become a juror without being at least 18 years old; you go through 18 years of education and maturity development before being ordered into such an important task. We can’t say the same for ROBLOXians; a defendant would be lucky if the average age of his/her jury was around middle school. Even then middle schoolers are going through a time of change and reality; do we actually expect these random children to be mature enough to make a decision on a case they probably could care less about?
You could make the same argument about judges; Barely any judges (if at all) are adults. However, at least judges are held to a higher standard, and have (presumably) been nominated and confirmed due to their above-average dedication and knowledge of the law. A judge, while still being young, can make a much more educated and mature decision than a minor who was randomly selected through a script on a game. It is unfair to the rule of law to let immature, undedicated minors dictate decisions.
| The Logistical Nightmare |
Have you ever tried to declare a court date in which yourself, the prosecutor, the defendant, and any witnesses can all attend? It’s not easy, as everyone as lives outside of ROBLOX and we do not (nor are expected) place ROBLOX before our own real lives.
Ever try to randomly select 6-10 random jurors, have them reviewed by the prosecutor & defendant, inform them on the law, and practically babysit all of them while making sure no jurors randomly leave and cause a mistrial? Any judge who’s incredibly successful at handling all of that without getting yelled at deserves a freaking medal, because it’s all a logistical nightmare. Not to mention how long jury trials usually take in-game; I remember having to take breaks just so my eyes wouldn’t start turning red from exhaustion.
When I was a federal judge, I would purposely avoid cases that weren’t jury trials because I simply couldn’t trust a jury to actually do their jobs; how do I know they won’t cause a mistrial and make me handle the case all over again? I know that’s incredibly selfish to do, but that was the reality. No wonder we have so many cases backlogged in the courts system; it takes ages to have a single jury trial handled, what about a hundred?
| The Solution |
The solution is unprecedented but necessary; juries have to go. Instead of uneducated minors deciding on a person’s fate, we need small panels of justice (such as 3-4) that vote on a case. Keep the unanimous verdict requirement, and we definitely need laws regulating the selection of non-leading judges and the challenging of rulings. However, the fact that there are ways to easily regulate and manage potential problems already provide something that juries don’t have; problems are solvable.
Without justice, our government is failing to enforce the rule of law. Without due process, our government is failing to protect the liberties of all Americans. Unfortunately, juries provide a very real possibility of both scenarios, and it’s time that our nation’s leaders begin the in-depth discussion of replacing juries.
– Editorial drafted by Tankslayer10 who serves as a legal correspondent for the Cable News Network (CNN).
Tankslayer10 has previously served as a Federal Judge along with being the former Commander of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division. He currently serves as a U.S. Attorney for the Department of Justice with a specialty in Criminal Defense.