The judges are evidently the problem here. They control the evidence the jury sees, and can give the jury instructions -- and, moreover, are now the ones blocking judicial review.
Judges are no better than juries of one. Worse, for consider what type of person becomes a judge.
...You must become a lawyer. But note the fact that judges earn 10-20x less than top-decile lawyers at an equal stage in their careers. The best lawyers can actually make 100x. (About $20M/year.)
...So you're either a failed lawyer who absolutely can't cut it in private practice, or the type of twisted personality who values status and power over your fellow man FAR more than you value money. Most of the time, the latter; in some cases you are a "covert politician" who wants to legislate from the bench.
Given the financial and status incentives, it's an extremely strange person who becomes a judge. I'd trust a jury, whatever its composition, before I trust an American judge to fairly determine my fate.
Judges are no better than juries of one. Worse, for consider what type of person becomes a judge.
...You must become a lawyer. But note the fact that judges earn 10-20x less than top-decile lawyers at an equal stage in their careers. The best lawyers can actually make 100x. (About $20M/year.)
...So you're either a failed lawyer who absolutely can't cut it in private practice, or the type of twisted personality who values status and power over your fellow man FAR more than you value money. Most of the time, the latter; in some cases you are a "covert politician" who wants to legislate from the bench.
Given the financial and status incentives, it's an extremely strange person who becomes a judge. I'd trust a jury, whatever its composition, before I trust an American judge to fairly determine my fate.