Must hear all evidence to render verdict


This letter is in reply to Mr. Yuksel's letter ("Jury swayed by too many 'coincidences,'" Oct. 5). Mr. Yuksel states that the jury in the Simpson case made the wrong decision and sarcastically suggests a coin toss would be as fair a method to decide cases as the current jury system.

We have an even better solution. Since Mr. Yuksel was apparently able to determine the correct verdict in the Simpson case without the benefit of actually sitting through all of the testimony (like the jurors did), perhaps the courts should consult him for future verdicts.

Mr. Yuksel also suggests that potential jurors be subjected to "a moderate level of informal logic and critical reasoning test." Why not take this idea even further? Since electing public officials is at least as important as rendering verdicts in court, perhaps we should subject voters to similar tests. Oh, wait . that was found to be unconstitutional.

Melissa Martinez

Education Post-Baccalaureate Student

Chip Orr

Hydrology and Water Resources Graduate Student

Read Next Article