> > As it is, even unanimous juries make many mistakes. A lot
> > of convictions are overturned after new evidence comes out after the
> > trial.
> I don't consider that a mistake on the jury's part. If there's an
> error, it's on the part of the investigators for not finding that
> evidence in the first place, or on the part of the people who had the
> evidence for not bringing it forward sooner. The jury cannot be held
> at fault for not considering the unknown.
The jury is supposed to find a person guilty of a criminal offense only
if the evidence proves him guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt." Of course
the jury cannot be held responsible for not considering the unknown.
However, if evidence surfaces after the trial that exonerates the
defendant, I think it's fair to say that the jury made a mistake in
concluding that the evidence presented at the trial proved the
defendant’s guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt." Now if witnesses lied at
the trial or if false evidence was presented, that is another story. In
any case, juries ought to be more careful about sending people off to
prison or to the executioner.
MDF