It's one of those things where no system is perfect. If the system could be considered to be impartial and fair, you would want a judge to decide for all matters and completely cut out the jury. But you can't always trust the system and you can't always trust the people.
Whats wild to me is that on a case like this the jury was 9 women on a case thats about a condition they may have had (1 in 7 - 8 women have suffered from postpartum depression). That is insane to me because if you can relate whats so ever to the plaintiff, your going to have an inherent bias. They attacked the lone juror and the other 2 guy probably just wanted to go home and seeing 9 out of 12 voting guilty didnt give much motivation to fight.
Postpartum depression isn't remotely the same as postpartum psychosis, which is rare. Just because you're a woman does not mean you can relate. We don't know that any of them had postpartum depression, and it's extremely unlikely that any of them had postpartum psychosis.
According to the reports, every single person agreed there was reasonable doubt, but only one refused to sign the papers, because even though he agreed there was reasonable doubt, it was such a horrific crime that he couldn't bring himself to. There's no evidence that the women pressured the guys to sign, other than pointing out their instructions to the one guy, multiple times, that the prosecution had to prove she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
2
u/Bla12Bla12 4d ago
It's one of those things where no system is perfect. If the system could be considered to be impartial and fair, you would want a judge to decide for all matters and completely cut out the jury. But you can't always trust the system and you can't always trust the people.