不可否認的，陪審團有可能遭人利用，例如利用登記陪審團席位，不管怎麼抽簽

不可否認的，陪審團有可能遭人利用，例如利用登記陪審團席位，不管怎麼抽簽都會抽到自己組織內的人，所以可以把持判決。陪審團的人是自主去登記陪審，在美國甚至有出席費，可能讓許多無業者利用為賺錢的機會，而真正具有專業素養者卻透過同樣的機會抽簽，如此的陪審團知識水準參差不齊，容易產生偏頗的認知，而使判決不客觀。法官在審理的過程就算明知被告有罪亦不能判其罪行，因為還需要透過陪審團的認可，例如，若美國巨星麥可傑克森之案其實他是有犯罪，但是可能因為陪審團中多數人因為非常喜愛這位明星，受其明星光環所影響，而使判決不公，這對受害者是萬分氣忿的事

結果 (英文) 1:

Admittedly, the jury is likely Zaoren use, for example by registering jury seats, no matter how the lottery will be able to get people within their own organization, so you can grip the decision. The jury of people to register is independent jury in the United States and even attendance fee, may take advantage of so many opportunities for the unemployed to make money, while the real person with professional knowledge but through the same opportunities to draw, so the jury uneven level of knowledge prone to cognitive bias, the decision not objective. During the trial judge even knowing that the defendant is guilty also can not judge their crimes, because the jury also recognized the need to pass through, for example, if the US superstar Michael Jackson's case, in fact he is a criminal, but probably because most people because the jury very fond of the star, the star aura by its influence, the ruling unfair, it is extremely indignant thing for victims

結果 (英文) 2:

There is no denying that juries can be used, for example, by using registered jury seats, and that no matter how they draw lots, they can draw people from their organization, so they can hold a verdict. Jury persons are self-registered jury, even in the United States even attendance fees, may allow many unemployed people to take advantage of the opportunity to make money, while the real professional is through the same opportunity to draw lots, so that the level of jury knowledge is uneven, easy to produce biased perception, and make the sentence not objective. The judge cannot convict the defendant even if he knows he is guilty in the trial, because it still needs to be approved by a jury, for example, if the case of American superstar Michael Jackson is actually a crime, but probably because most people on the jury because they love the star very much, because of his star aura, and the sentence is unfair. It's a great deal for the victims.

結果 (英文) 3:

There is no denying that juries may be used by others. For example, by using the registered juries' seats, no matter how many people draw lots, they will be drawn into their own organizations, so they can hold the verdict. Juries' people go to register juries on their own, and even have attendance fees in the United States, which may allow many unemployed people to take advantage of the opportunity to make money, while the real professional people draw through the same opportunity The level of knowledge of such a jury is uneven, and it is easy to produce biased cognition, which makes the verdict not objective. Even if the judge knows the defendant is guilty in the trial process, he cannot be convicted of the crime, because he still needs to be recognized by the jury. For example, if the case of Michael Jackson, an American superstar, is actually a crime, it may be because most people in the jury like it very much A star, influenced by his star aura, makes the judgment unfair, which is very angry for the victim