Dans le cadre des midis de l’éthique du CRÉ, Andreï Poama nous offrira une présentation intitulée « Waiving Jury Delibaration: The Humility Argument ».
This paper argues that, given the current pervasive disagreement (and uncertainty) about the reliability of jury deliberation, we should adopt an attitude of epistemic humility toward it. I further argue that such an attitude should be expressed and enforced by turning jury deliberation from a mandatory rule of the jury trial to a waivable right of the defendant. I consider two possible objections to my argument: the first one concerns the putative selfdefeatingness of an attitude of (epistemic) humility; the second objection examines the burdensomeness of granting an unconditional jury deliberation waiver to the defendant. Both objections, I conclude, can be rejected.