The US solution has the potential for real abuse. Low pay means that corruption is rife in some low levels of the judiciary, and there is a danger that out-of-towners always lose cases against locals, because the locals and their relatives vote.
That said, I watched a prog on late night BBC2, OU thing, I think, about local elected judges and this female said that, in essence, you'd be surprised how well people take losing so long as they feel they've had a fair shake.
There's no ideal system, but I think that the system, "M'lud", and basically it is impossible to appeal on matters of fact in civil hearings, is a very corrupting process. P**s me off and I'll find against you on a point of fact and then you're screwed. I don't give a shit about the real impression that the evidence made on me. The same holds true for minor criminal trials. They don't ask themselves, "Has the matter been proved beyond a reasonable doubt?", they ask themselves, "Am I entitled to convict?", which is a completely separate question. Copper says he saw it, if it goes to appeal I'll say that he was entirely credible and reliable and nobody else was, there's an end to it.
Very, very corrupting world.
