This should probably convince us that the jury trial is the best possible way to decide a trial, because all jurors should be consistent in their decisions. So, after what we've discussed, we might ask: why not just bring in a qualified expert who would systematically evaluate all the evidence, just as well as the jury? This may be in part because we are interested in jurors' individual differences and rely on their use of unique knowledge and experiences to ensure that each case is examined from as many different angles as possible; and the use of several jurors gives us a great variability of these