It’s also worth thinking about whether we can trust juries to make decisions which aren’t based on prejudice, whether that’s based on the defendant’s appearance or background or simply assuming that they’re guilty because they are being charged. Who is to say that a judge does not have exactly the same human traits?

Having a jury of 12 good men and true has the distinct advantage of spreading the risk and thereby hopefully diminishing bias. It is argued that this will give a fairer outcome.
   It could be argued that as Autism is a reduced capacity to interact with people then perhaps they would concentrate on purely the facts and logic, not being distracted by emotion, (Approximating Vulcans in fact) thereby becoming ideal jury material.

    For complex financial trials of long duration perhaps the jury system should be modified or dispensed with.