Quote Originally Posted by Xiahou
If the law is too archaic for your average juror to be able to comprehend, then I don't think it's the jurors that are the problem.

No.
The law is not archaic, and i believe that you've no idea of what you're talking about. The law is complicated, the text doesn't explain just by itself, it has centuries of tireless studies behind, and even some questions still don't have any certain answer. But just to enlight your doubts i would give you and example. You're a juror and you'll say me what is your decision on this case: A train is going close to a river when it suddenly looses control. The wagons are full of children and to save some of them the driver must separate various wagons of the front so at least the children on the back can survive. Do you think that this guy is justifated? And notice that this is a very simple case in the doctrine. But make your guesses.