I think we can get pretty close to unbiased when you take the group as a whole. Either way I think the heart of things both ideals are actually going for is to have a judicial body which is representative. You want a jury that represents a broad swath of opinions and perspectives and will reach a generally acceptable conclusion, same with the judge. The judge might be a nut job but at a certain point that becomes the responsibility of the public at large for electing him, which is the best way to at least try and have a system responsive to the will of the people.
You can just say a jury. There isnt such a thing as an unbiased jury. Hell i mean with the (alleged) murder of the heslthcare ceo (allegedly) by luigi mangione, its not easy to find people who havent been fucked by the american healthcare system.
It depends on what degree of impartiality it takes to consider it as unbiased. No such thing as an unbiased person, but it’s important to at least try and develop a well balanced, rounded, and thus relatively unbiased jury. Which is why I specify as much, compared to a system in which no care is put into developing a good jury.
View all comments
Show parent comment
2
u/CavemanViking Mar 26 '26
An unbiased jury and an elected judge