DISCUSSION: The main point is that we should keep the unanimity requirement.
It doesn’t lead to many downsides (paragraph 2) and it has benefits (paragraph 3).
- Not quite. The requirement is being reexamined. This passage argues against a proposal to scrap the requirement.
- This is not the author’s point at all. Lines 31-33 show that the author thinks a hung jury is a sign that the jury did its job.
- The author never mentions evidence. And they don’t think hung juries are a sign of a flaw in the justice system. See lines 31-33.
- The author’s point is that the unanimity requirement forces jurors to be conscientious. They can’t leave the room unless everybody agrees, so they have to talk about it.
- CORRECT. Fairness is mentioned in paragraph 3, and it seems to be the author’s main concern. In paragraph 2 the author argues costs are minimal, if any. So we should keep hung juries.
Need help with RC? → Try the RC Mastery Seminar
Solve hard passages quickly