Murder at Cape Cod - The Mc.Cowen case

I first got to know about the Mc.Cowen case, when I switched on my TV and saw reports of jury deliberation in the case. Watching the discussions on Court TV, i was curious to know what had happened in this case and I did some research into it. I found out that Christa Worthington, a fashion writer, had been allegedly raped and killed by a garbage collector, Christopher Mc Cowen. The crucial piece of evidence was semen found on the deceased's body. A DNA test showed that the semen was that of the accused. The accused claimed to have consensual intercourse with her and said that he had no clue of who had murdered Ms. Worthington. As the jury deliberated, I was wondering what I would do if I were asked to decide the case. I felt that there was an element of doubt here. Arguing that a high - society fashion write, a white female would not have consensual intercourse with a garbage collector, an African American man was not a theory that I was convinced with. Just on the basis of this evidence, if I were to decide the case, I would have acquitted the accused. There is more than an iota of doubt as regards his involvement in the crime.
The jury must have had a tough time. They deliberated for around 30 hours, were then sequestered. Then, there was a controversy Juror No. 4 having spoken to her boyfriend about the case, leading to her removal from the jury. I expected the jury to take ages again. But, lo and behold, they had reached a decision within a few hours! The accused was found guilty of first degree murder, aggravated rape and aggravated burglary and sentenced to life in prison, without parole.
I was aghast. This could not have happened. Media reports say that the case will be appealed and there is likelihood of it being reversed. But that brings the question as to whether the jury system is appropriate. The United States Constitution provides for a jury trial. Inspite of cases like that of OJ Simpson (who now is publishing a "hypothetical" account of how he could have killed his wife and her boyfriend), the jury system continues. The Judge, in criminal cases, is in my opinion, unfortunately only like a clerk. With no role in decision making and no role in sentencing, with the emergence of guidelines, why does one need a judge at all? I am sure that if the accused here had waived his right to a trial by jury, he would have found himself acquitted. The jury just seemed to be reflecting the stereotypes in society and relying on one picece of unconvincing evidence to convict the accused. Time will only tell whether they were right in deciding the way they did.