General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: If a juror feels he or she made the right decison, why hide? [View all]Yo_Mama
(8,303 posts)Such as, historically, Mafia/gang cases? You think those types of organizations wouldn't threaten families?
Rich people as defendants? Wouldn't target the juries?
The jury system exists to equalize the playing field between the powerful with influence and the rest of the population. Fine, it's imperfect. But it is better than the alternative.
Who the hell would serve on the jury of a powerful gang member up for murder without anonymity? You'd be better off going to jail, or you'd be forced to acquit.
In this case, because of the nature of the case and the public passions aroused, these jurors would be harassed by media if nothing else. In practice, I'm sure they would be exposed to death threats if their names were publicized regardless of whichever verdict they reached.
The prosecution and the defense, supervised by the judge, vet the jurors. They have a chance right there to get rid of those who might have a connection or personal prejudice. What additional purpose would it serve to have the public in on it? Do you think the public doesn't have some very imbalanced, very violent members?