-
lucas in reply to @MultiGrooves
The idea that creatures as fallible as humans could be totally objective laughable.
That is why there are several people and they must come to a consensus, it supposed to eliminate any individual's bias.IF driving is normalised to the majority of them what kind of bias do you expect to see? When media outlets constantly dropping the moronic "WAR ON MOTORISTS" headlines once every 3/4 months, you think this doesn't affect jurors? Even if they themselves don't drive, they'll have people close to them that do drive. How many understand that their driving habit is is not covered by V.E.D (just wait for the puzzled faces..."It's road tax!"). How many understand they're being subsidised by everyone else?
MultiGrooves-
Don't you think that guardian articles saying that alludes to them basically being biased in the manner you describe won't reinforce that such rhetoric as "The war on motorists"?
Extreme opinions on either side of the debate will always polarize it, when in reality I think that most people are decent people and will make the right decision given the right facts. I suspect the low percentages of convictions is because there "must be no reasonable doubt".
cookiesdonniedarko
That is why there are several people and they must come to a consensus, it supposed to eliminate any individual's bias.