The Pistorius problem

Diomedes writes: In my experience, limited as it is, I got selected and then somehow was made Foreman of the Jury. The trial was awful. The accused was probably guilty of conspiring with his friend. BUT - the prosecution fucked things up and we were deadlocked. Ordinary people in room trying to agree. Why was I the foreman here?? Eeeek. So I took it and listened and argued this & that. What I kept in my head was "beyond a shadow of doubt" and I had doubt. We eventually had 1 guy left and eventually he went with our decision to acquit. This really hurt me hard to make it happen. A woman had been cut on her face with a knife, a clear case of bodily harm. But we had to acquit the accused attacker for lack of direct evidence that HE was the perpetrator. We had oodles of evidence that she had been assaulted and seriously injured. This was never in doubt. The problem was that she accused a friend of the man who probably did the damage. There is no way I was happy with whatever we decided to do. All the witnesses were hiding what really happened, including the victim herself. It was sad.Now, does this mean I lose faith in the jury system? NO. NO. & NO.It is the best we have to date. Not perfect, but better than the others.