died suffered from a rare and complex medical condition and the case was argued for and against via the use of expert medical witnesses wThe whole question as to whether criminal trials should be decided upon via a layman jury has come to the fore once again. A case in the U.K. where a young boy died with five times the normal levels of salt in his blood has highlighted a difficult problem.

The two adults who were attempting to adopt him were accused of manslaughter and, basically, of force feeding him salt. They won an appeal in the British courts which was presided over by a judge and a jury.

However, the case revolved around the possibility that this young boy who died suffered from a rare and complex medical condition and the case was argued for and against via the use of expert medical witnesses w

U.K. where a young boy died with five times the normal levels of salt in his blood has highlighted a difficult problem.

The two adults who were attempting to adopt him were accused of manslaughter and, basically, of force feeding him salt. They won an appeal in the British courts which was presided over by a judge and a jury.

However, the case revolved around the possibility that this young boy who died suffered from a rare and complex medical condition and the case was argued for and against via the use of expert medical witnesses w

ts who were attempting to adopt him were accused of manslaughter and, basically, of force feeding him salt. They won an appeal in the British courts which was presided over by a judge and a jury.

However, the case revolved around the possibility that this young boy who died suffered from a rare and complex medical condition and the case was argued for and against via the use of expert medical witnesses w

tish courts which was presided over by a judge and a jury.

However, the case revolved around the possibility that this young boy who died suffered from a rare and complex medical condition and the case was argued for and against via the use of expert medical witnesses w

died suffered from a rare and complex medical condition and the case was argued for and against via the use of expert medical witnesses who attempted to provide an up-to-date record of current evidence, research, and knowledge.

But how can a jury of normal human beings decide on a case which is filled with such complexity and which, in addition, could only be descriptively analyzed and contested by advanced medical brains? This begs the question as to whether juries should be made up of expert observers but less, in turn, will it raise the difficulty in actually getting experts on a regular enough basis to sit through lengthy complex trials.

The other alternative is t