This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2012, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Recently, two distinguished Utah judges encouraged citizens to serve on juries: Utah Supreme Court Chief Justice Matthew B. Durrant ("Been called to jury duty?" Opinion, April 28) and Justice Court Judge Paul C. Farr ("Jury duty too much to ask?" Opinion, May 8).
I've written Tribune op-eds in defense of prosecutors ("Prosecutors don't simply rubber-stamp police decisions," Opinion, Feb. 5, 2011).
Local defense attorney Ronald Yengich dissented in a letter to the editor ("Favoring the police," Forum, Feb. 22, 2011). Online comments overwhelmingly favored Yengich's views.
Judges, too, have received their share of opprobrium, both from Tribune readers in online comments and from The Tribune itself.
If I'm wrong, and if, in fact, police do routinely misuse the power entrusted to them while prosecutors and judges routinely overlook abuses, it seems to me that the best antidote for such overreaching is the constitutional guarantee afforded an accused of a trial by his or her peers.
After all, who will stand up to allegedly corrupt police, prosecutors and judges if jurors and the juries on which they serve won't do it?
It's easier to complain than to be a part of the solution, I suppose.
Ken K. Gourdin
Tooele