> “Modern crime investigation tech practically eliminates doubt.”

I would suspect you have little to no actual experience with our court system. I have to disagree vehemently. Not to mention that even with the horrific problems with *tech literacy* of those with authority, just the general and insane levels of corruption and politicization of our court system make the already unreliable tech situation often meaningless. And aside from even all of that, there remains the deep and serious problem of illegality and morality often diverging massively from each other.

In other words there are multiple layers of problems, corruption, and stupidity that permeate the entire “justice system” even after we just ignore the problem with the law itself very often being a miserable insult to the concepts of “fair” or “just.” 

 These are valid points, but you are OK with executing those that plead guilty? If not, then what you object to is different than what you originally stated as the reason. What I was referring to are cases in which DNA, video/audio recordings identities the suspect 100%. Of course letting a eandom always decide is one of the greatest stupidities of our modern “democracies”. There should be a heavy screening process, as there should be for voting. Otherwise idiocracy is inevitable.