Poll

[timepiececlock]

I'd like to be able to say this is for a class project. I'd like to be able to say it's for some kind of social study to help me get good grades and analyze the mentality of the internet and the level of political thinking or spirituality of fandom-goers.

The truth is, this is not for a school project. It's a me project. I want to know how people regard the way a jury trial works in conflict with personal morals. I want a sample made up of my peers answering the following questions.

So, I would be grateful if you would post a link to this poll in your journal, and encourage others to do the same.


[Poll #405992]

Comments

[caille.livejournal.com]

"If you think Peterson killed his wife but the evidence was not strong enough to convict him, do you still agree with the decision?"

I couldn't answer this question, because I believe he killed his wife, and I believe the evidence, though circumstantial, met the burden of proof. If I felt it hadn't, I'd have had to favor acquittal. It's up to the state to prove a defendant committed the crime; it's not up to the defendant to prove his innocence.

[rashaka.livejournal.com]

Thanks for giving your opinion; I knew not everyone would end up answering every question, the way the poll was designed. :)

[mrthursday.livejournal.com]

The opinions of a an English law student possibly don't count, but if they did I would need to read the case before commenting. I only know what was commented upon in the BBC reports.
I like Juries though. And I like Jury Nullfication.