In order for the justice system to function properly, a court needs to provide the accused with fair and impartial treatment. But is it really possible for a juror to put their own biases aside when deciding on a defendant’s guilt or innocence? No matter how open-minded a person may believe themselves to be, we all have different opinions and experiences, and there’s no way to be truly fair and impartial.
Of course, courts still need to aim for juries that are as close to fairness and impartiality as humanly possible. It’s extremely important to select jurors who are willing to believe that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Jurors also need to be willing to award financial compensation for damage that can’t actually be fixed with money. These concepts often go against human instinct, making it very difficult to find suitable jurors.
It’s not enough for a potential juror to claim that they are fair and impartial. They need to be tested on those notions with proper questioning before they can serve on a jury. This is the only way to treat people who are accused of crimes justly.
.
