CET: Sorry, but I think that probably IS how criminal law works! Sorry, I'm a pragmatist. I have no legal experience, no legal training, I've never sat on a jury. But if you think that, despite whatever the judge might say, some of the jurors don't go "Ooooh! Look at him! He looks guilty", etc... You get my drift. I might know sod all about legal theory, but I flatter myself I know a bit about human nature! ;-)

We're also splitting hairs & playing semantics rather. For me, "I think you're guilty" DOES mean beyond reasonable doubt. But I could also conceive of myself saying that, and still thinking that I was certain enough to convict someone, but not certain enough that they should die. I DO see a difference between "I am certain enough that you committed the crime to convict you" and "I am not certain enough to impose a death penalty". Compare the Breivik case, where there is absolutely no doubt about who was doing the killing, and a recent case in the UK where a family was convicted of murdering their daughter, Shafilea Ahmed. The evidence was strong enough to secure convictions of both parents, yet there remain several versions of events, and the possibility that the conviction of one or both parents could be incorrect.

I consider myself fairly intelligent (IQ tests usually register @140, for whatever that is worth!), extremely rational, and without any particular cultural biases. I am also too aware that my fellow jurors are likely to not be all, or even any, of those things. That's precisely why I make the point that only judges should be passing sentence. The possibility of a judge not allowing the death penalty once a jury has found the prisoner guilty doesn't bother me in the slightest. No crime has an automatic penalty at present and, as far as I am aware, in the UK the jury never recommends a sentence. If that happens elsewhere, as you'll gather, I'd simply remove it from the process. The jury's role is solely to weigh up the evidence & render verdict accordingly.

MGM & gnu - as already noted, I think "reasonable" is a bit of a woolly defintion, aye.