In fact, they have many advantages that seem to catapult them ahead of jury trials. An example of an advantage is the acquittal rate, which amounts to a staggering 43.9%. This means that almost 44% of all potential prisoners never reach the prison system, which, in turn, saves a huge amount of money (Document A). Another advantage is the speed of trials before the judge. Judges are some of the most educated and intelligent people in America: their credentials date back to years of law school and decades of experience in the legal system (Document B). So far, these benefits appear to outweigh the costs of a jury. After all, a jury is slow, has the potential to fail, is biased, and is made up of fallible beings with no judicial experience, right? The answer to this question is yes, but there is a problem. A jury also consists of the best candidates chosen by intelligent lawyers with years of experience. A jury also “elevates ordinary citizens to positions of self-government” (Document C). A jury is fair, compassionate and composed of twelve unique and valid opinions. A jury is made up of ordinary people, and that's what makes them extraordinary. If one were to ask themselves “would you rather be tried by your peers, or by a judge who gets paid to do so and has to hear thousands of cases a year” what would your choice be? In essence, a jury is expensive and has every potential to fail, but it has been proven time and time again that