The fact that he was acquitted ought to underscore the following point to you: though trial by jury may generally be a good thing (I think it is), juries don't necessarily issue the appropriate verdict. But, really, this is pretty pointless unless you want to argue the facts of the case.
> > I was under the impression that perhaps Schiavo isn't a
> > vegetable. (I could be dead wrong about that. Though I haven't
> > paid much attention to the case, it's apparent that there's a
> > lot of bullshit floating around out there.)
>
> I'm laughing just reading this. You've just made my point concretely:
> you (and most of the media I've encountered!) have absolutely no place
> forming an opinion about this issue. Period.
I have no place proclaiming an opinion because I haven't bothered to form one. Otherwise, I'd probably have a fairly well-reasoned one. Fetishizing trial by jury doesn't make for a convincing defense of the practice.
-- Luke