Re: Except the jury dont award anything, they decide guilt
If this is the case, and in the US, juries are asked to decide not only on the verdict of a trial, but on the sentence as well, then what is even the point of having judges? You might as well have mob rule.
Judges generally have two roles in a court case - making the decision, based on the evidence, of whether a case has merit (e.g. whether the plaintiff is guilty), and deciding the sentence, based on sentencing guidelines, severity, context, and in relation to other offenders and other crimes of a similar nature. A jury can be reasonably expected to perform the first of these roles, although you're still throwing the dice a little bit, depending on the biases of jurors. I'd not let a jury anywhere near sentencing, unless you want an inconsistent mess, and in the US, a massive increase in the use of the death penalty.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
