Since judges are in fact allowed to throw out a conviction by the jury regardless of the guilty verdict, the justice system proves that jurors are unnecessary in a conviction. So in fact- the judge doesn't even have to agree with the jury. Despite the judge asking for the jury's verdict. Otherwise the judge wouldn't have the choice to throw out the conviction and would just allow a retrial be granted through the appellate process, amirite?

100%Yeah You Are0%No Way
England51stStates avatar Law
0 3
The voters have decided that England51stState is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

Your totally backwards...but thanks for trying...someone convicted of a crime by a judge has every right to appeal to a higher court... When they do this they ask for judgement over ruling the last ( ass head corrupt judges ) decision

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.