Wow, I thought this kind of thing was done away with years ago

[--Pete]

Hi,

But a charismatic attorney can, at least occasionally, argue his way out of the laws of physics, at least as far as a jury is concerned. This is not a problem with laws, but with juries.

Too true. The jury system evolved when things were much simpler. Nowadays, how many jurors out of twelve would understand a case based on statistics? One, maybe? How many are qualified to look at two pieces of computer code and determine if one was plagiarized from the other? Heck, how many can even follow a simple argument and spot the fallacies?

It's past time to adopt some kind of a professional juror system. People trained in law, logic, forensics, etc. who are licensed and paid to be jurors. But that's another thread. :whistling:

--Pete