>Have you seen something even remotely comparable to the case being discussed here?
The tobacco cases come to mind.
The tobacco cases come to mind.
Just because they happened to make the right choice doesn't make them competent. A broken clock is right twice a day.
So let me get this right...you don’t think a jury can comprehend and understand the facts being presented to them through experts, yet without hearing any facts or experts you can confirm these juries “made the right choice”?
As I said before there will be educated people in this thread who down play a juries ability to make a accurate finding of fact and yet be all to happy to make their own findings without any knowledge of the facts of a given case or expert testimony, just as you did.
Yes. It's possible to make a good decision through a flawed process.
I don't know where you're getting the idea that I endorse autocratic rulers, but it's absurd and borderline inflammatory.