The jury system operates to weed out people who would make good jurors. From Doug Casey at internationalman.com:
International Man: What is the role of a justice system in a society, and what should the State have to do with it?
Doug Casey: In my view, what really holds a society together isn’t the laws enacted by legislatures or dictators, but peer pressure, social opprobrium, and moral approbation. In general, society is pretty self-regulating. It’s why people pay their bills at restaurants even though there’s not a cop at the door. Criminals are the exception, not the rule—although, it must be said, they naturally gravitate towards the government.
When somebody commits a crime, there’s a trial to determine what harm has been done, who should be compensated, and so forth. Courts determine these things. But I would argue that the state is not a necessary part of any of this. Society, like markets, tends to be self-ordering.
With a minimal “night watchman” sort of state like that described by Ayn Rand, the proper role of government is simply to defend you from force and fraud. This implies an army to defend you from force external to your society, a police force to defend you from force within your society, and a court system to allow the adjudication of disputes without resorting to force.
I could live in a society like that—it would be a vast improvement over what we have now. A proper court system, with either arbitrators or judges and juries system, would be part of it. But I’d go on to argue that juries and courts should be privatized.
STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC 
A great book was written by Lysander Spooner (Early 19th century philosopher), titled “Trial by Jury.” The jury was the ultimate arbiter of law, facts and evidence. The jury could completely nullify a law by ruling that it was unconstitutional and did not reflect any attempt at moral guidance, rendering it unenforceable by the state. This prevented the state from slipping in laws that protected its ‘right’ to use violence to enforce its plunder upon the citizens. The jury could suspend the right to enforce a law under specific given circumstances. If speeding through town and running red lights normally put people in danger, but in the instance of someone trying to get an injured person to medical care, slowing through red lights when no one was around, and otherwise being careful but exceeding normal limits the jury could rule that the individual acted prudently and with good reason for going outside the normal bounds of safety.
I was recently selected for jury duty and was sent a letter asking if I would apply the law only as the judge told me to apply it and abide by any decision of the court as to what would be acceptable as evidence and how the court determined I was to apply any decisions. The state has already determined the outcome of the trial, I was just to be a rubber stamp.
LikeLike
@ CCB,
Told them I had bad hearing/vision and was never bothered again.
Jury nullification is the way until the steaming fourth world turd banana republic goes full Weimarbabwe.
NPR box wine auntie says no opinion on Trump in the kangaroo gallery…riiighht.
LOL! Just read Houthis have shot down three drones valued at $30 million each.
Yes we can!
LikeLike