0:11
the founders established the right to a
0:14
jury because prosecutors and judges
0:16
cannot be dependent upon to be competent
0:18
or honest and justice is more likely to
0:21
be achieved if the decision is made by
0:24
persons independent of bias or ambition
0:27
even if they are not experts in the law
0:29
when this constitutional republic was
0:32
founded the standard of due process was
0:35
to have all issues of law argued orally
0:38
in the presence of the jury few
0:40
arguments were written but during the
0:42
19th century the practice arose of the
0:45
presiding magistrate requiring the
0:48
parties to file written pleadings for
0:50
him to consider in deciding chambers
0:52
outside the presence of the jury the
0:55
right of due process is denied if all
0:58
arguments of law are not made in the
1:00
presence of the jury if they are not
1:02
provided copies of all pleadings and
1:04
have the use of an adequate law library
1:07
the opinion of the presiding magistrate
1:10
about what is the law and his
1:12
instructions to the jury are evidence of
1:15
the law but not the law itself as
1:18
evidence it is testimony the presiding
1:21
magistrate should be required to step
1:23
down from the bench and testify as an
1:26
expert witness subject to
1:28
cross-examination and rebuttal in a
1:31
constitutional republic all issues of
1:34
law are also issues of fact as a juror
1:39
in a criminal trial it is up to you to
1:41
decide whether the charge is authorized
1:44
by statute whether the statute is
1:46
authorized by Constitution whether the
1:49
law is applicable or whether there was
1:51
prosecutorial or judicial misconduct
1:54
that violated the rights of the accused
1:55
if you have doubts about any of that you
1:59
must vote to acquit but how can you not
2:02
have doubts if the issues of law are not
2:05
argued in your presence without such
2:07
argument key elements of the complete
