How reliable are juries?

In reference to a story Wednesday in The News Virginian (“Judge upholds 22-year sentence for embezzlement”), where a jury recommended almost 23 years in prison for a woman convicted of embezzlement, the sentence was upheld by the judge.

The probation officer for Wendy Sprouse stated that sentencing guidelines called for less than three years. Was the jury made aware of these guidelines, or did its members have some axe to grind?

Judge Humes Franklin said he felt like embezzlement was worse than a violent case because you had taken someone’s trust and used it to your advantage.

In the very same paper, a woman was charged with second-degree murder for killing her boyfriend with a knife. She’d reached a plea agreement, no doubt. But isn’t that taking someone’s LIFE?

I recently watched an episode of “Dallas DNA,” which described the recall of 40 on death row whose cases were recalled because DNA testing was not available when they were sentenced. Eighteen of the 40 were exonerated. Almost half.

Had it not been for DNA testing, juries in Texas would have sent 18 innocent men to their deaths. So how reliable are juries?

G.P. McClung

Raphine