D.S.K.: Judges or Jury?

„Reason free from passion: this definition of the law, from Aristotle by way of Legally Blonde (a movie about a woman’s difficulty getting her male attorneys to believe her), becomes relevant again. The spotlight that the accusations against Dominique Strauss-Kahn shone, in May, on the differences between the French and the American judicial systems is casting different shadows today. Then, there was speculation in France that the egalitarian nature of the American jury system was loaded against Strauss-Kahn. In France, verdicts are rendered by a panel of professional judges, who are not political appointees but, rather, chosen meritocratically by a demanding series of exams. Some commentators cast doubt on the ability of a jury of nonspecialists to reach fair-minded and unprejudiced decisions.

Today, the prosecution’s questions about the strength of its own case arise from the distinctive psychology of trial by jury. The news that has emerged regarding Strauss-Kahn’s accuser suggests that she may have engaged in behavior, unrelated to this case, that could land her in legal hot water, and it suggests that she may have lied to authorities. Both of these suggestions would make her an unreliable witness at trial.”