A lot of times in self defense cases, where someone is being tried for murder, it is not always obvious what decision should be made. Because of this the composition of the jury can make a big difference whether that person is found guilty or innocent. In self-defense a trial by judge might be your best bet. Judged by Twelve: You Don't Want a Trial by Jury, Armed Attorneys This woman was a former prosecutor in Galveston county, Texas, so knows what she is talking about. She describes how important it is in a case to get the right 12 people on a jury, and how there is inherent selection bias when determining who will sit on the jury, with both the prosecution and defense getting to eliminate anyone whom they do not think will be good for their case. A phenomena called the "five-o'clock verdict" is mentioned, where even if the members of a jury disagree, by the time five-o'clock roles around they all want to go home, so oftentimes those jury members holding out will be likely to just give in to the group pressure and agree. "You can have the best defense attorney in the world, and if you get a bad jury, so are sunk." "No attorney can tell you exactly what a jury is going to do with your case." It can also depend whether one is making a technical legal argument - then go for the judge - or has emotion on one's side - then go for the jury.
Yeah it's an interesting commentary on juries in general. I've never been a big fan of them, but it's probably good advice that if your story is a highly sympathetic one, that's more likely to sway a jury, and if your story has an advantage in facts or legal technicalities, then go for a judge. I like what they said about duty to retreat too, and that even if legally you don't have a duty to retreat, the jury is still a crapshoot. Regardless of dumb laws, self-defense is still only truly if your life is in danger. Of course these lawyers are going to see the more problematic cases. If a case is just clearly self-defense, the DA isn't going to be filing the charges anyway in most cases because they don't want to risk losing.
Prolly depends a lot on the values of the local population from which your 'peers' are to be chosen. Its a sad fact, but a fact nonetheless, self defense is increasingly only a theoretical right in some of the more progressive parts of this country. The problem is that even judges arent without bias. Your best chance of avoiding political persecution for simply not being a soft, helpless victim jellyfish person is to simply not go to these places if you dont absolutely have to. I hate that I have to visit them for work.
The jury power has been watered down by the government at least since the Sparf decision in 1895. The convictions in the Jan6 debacle show how successful the government's efforts have been. Juries who do not know right from wrong, combined with judges with the same mindset announces the end of the American experiment.
