Selwyn Duke
We can thank a flawed jury system for the Steinle verdict
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By Selwyn Duke
December 3, 2017

Much has been said about the acquittal of felonious invader Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, the killer of young Kate Steinle, who died in her father's arms. Yet while most of the focus has been on "sanctuary cities" – a euphemism for treasonous, lawless cities – there perhaps has been no scrutiny of the people whose minds are too often a sanctuary from knowledge and reality: modern jurors.

The problem stems from "The Error of Impartiality," which is the title of an essay on this very subject. For what is often perceived in jurors as fairness is just fecklessness, of the moral variety.

When choosing jurors, pains are taken to dismiss people with preconceived notions about the case. But consider: If in question is a high-profile matter such as the O.J. Simpson or Steinle case, what kind of person would know nothing about it and/or have formed no opinions? Does this reflect impartiality or just indifference?

Assuming such a person makes the ideal juror is like supposing that someone still undecided the day before a high-profile election is surely a better voter than someone who reads the news and formed an opinion early on. An undecided individual may be a better voter in the particular (relative to a given wrongly decided voter), but in principle this supposition simply is untrue. G.K. Chesterton explained the matter brilliantly in the aforementioned essay, writing:

What people call impartiality may simply mean indifference, and what people call partiality may simply mean mental activity. It is sometimes made an objection, for instance, to a juror that he has formed some primâ-facie opinion upon a case: if he can be forced under sharp questioning to admit that he has formed such an opinion, he is regarded as manifestly unfit to conduct the inquiry. Surely this is unsound. If his bias is one of interest, of class, or creed, or notorious propaganda, then that fact certainly proves that he is not an impartial arbiter. But the mere fact that he did form some temporary impression from the first facts as far as he knew them – this does not prove that he is not an impartial arbiter – it only proves that he is not a cold-blooded fool.

If we walk down the street, taking all the jurymen who have not formed opinions and leaving all the jurymen who have formed opinions, it seems highly probable that we shall only succeed in taking all the stupid jurymen and leaving all the thoughtful ones. Provided that the opinion formed is really of this airy and abstract kind, provided that it has no suggestion of settled motive or prejudice, we might well regard it not merely as a promise of capacity, but literally as a promise of justice. The man who took the trouble to deduce from the police reports would probably be the man who would take the trouble to deduce further and different things from the evidence. The man who had the sense to form an opinion would be the man who would have the sense to alter it.


Chesterton also noted that the logical outcome of our "impartiality" standard is that a "case ought to be tried by Esquimaux, or Hottentots, or savages from the Cannibal Islands – by some class of people who could have no conceivable interest in the parties, and moreover, no conceivable interest in the case. The pure and starry perfection of impartiality would be reached by people who not only had no opinion before they had heard the case, but who also had no opinion after they had heard it."

The essay is pure gold, and I strongly recommend you read the whole thing.

I once wrote a piece titled "Why Most Voters Shouldn't Vote," and a corresponding principle may be that most jurors shouldn't sit on juries. People so apathetic that they couldn't be bothered to try and determine reality on high profile candidates or cases probably won't transform, magically, into sagacious sleuths of reality upon entering a ballot or jury box. Apathy is not an asset, and ignorance is not a virtue.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

© Selwyn Duke

 

The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)

Click to enlarge

Selwyn Duke

Selwyn Duke (@SelwynDuke) has written for The Hill, Observer, The American Conservative, WorldNetDaily and American Thinker. He has also contributed to college textbooks published by Gale – Cengage Learning, has appeared on television and is a frequent guest on radio. His website is www.SelwynDuke.com.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Selwyn Duke: Click here

More by this author

June 20, 2022
Why Bill Maher can’t kick his Democrat Party addiction


June 15, 2022
You REALLY want federal gun control intervention? Well, here’s an idea for you


May 6, 2022
Is the left agitating for war with Russia so it can cement domestic tyranny?


March 15, 2022
Alas, the best outcome in Ukraine now may be a relatively quick Russian victory


February 23, 2022
Gunmaker’s new “AR-15 for Kids” has left shooting intellectual blanks


February 18, 2022
Anyone who’d cancel George Washington is an enemy within


February 13, 2022
Killing civilization: They’re teaching schoolkids 'the narrative'


February 3, 2022
Hit back hard: Here’s how you defeat a racism charge


January 31, 2022
A black female SCOTUS judge won’t do a darn thing to help blacks


January 24, 2022
Here’s PROOF that reducing “transwomen’s” testosterone levels does not eliminate their edge over real women in sports


More articles

 

Stephen Stone
'The fervent prayer of the righteous'

Siena Hoefling
Protect the Children: Update with VIDEO

Stephen Stone
Flashback: Dems' fake claim that Trump and Utah congressional hopeful Burgess Owens want 'renewed nuclear testing' blows up when examined

Matt C. Abbott
My New York Times letter on Dobbs/Roe

Stephen Stone
In defense of Sen. Mike Lee

Rev. Mark H. Creech
Statement on overturning of Roe v. Wade

Tom DeWeese
Cancel Culture is cancelling itself

Linda Goudsmit
The Dr. Duke Show: June 23, 2022 Linda Goudsmit discusses the global takeover of American education

Tom DeWeese
We must harden our schools – mentally and physically – Here’s how and why

Curtis Dahlgren
'Don't weep for the dead; weep for the living.' – Jeremiah

Michael Bresciani
Nancy Pelosi says drag queens are what America is all about!

Jerry Newcombe
Violence in the name of “Jane’s revenge”

Peter Lemiska
The January 6th hearings – A pathetic act of desperation

Victor Sharpe
A nuclear Iran in our world

Selwyn Duke
Why Bill Maher can’t kick his Democrat Party addiction
  More columns

Cartoons


Click for full cartoon
More cartoons

RSS feeds

News:
Columns:

Columnists

Matt C. Abbott
Chris Adamo
Russ J. Alan
Bonnie Alba
Chuck Baldwin
Kevin J. Banet
J. Matt Barber
Fr. Tom Bartolomeo
. . .
[See more]

Sister sites