I assume the commenter is proposing to not have jurors. There are other kinds of trials. The Germans do it very differently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Germany

In short, they don't have jurors, but a panel of judges. The judges are not passive, as they are in the US. That is, in the US, judges are referees between two opposing sides. In Germany, the judges are active participants, and can inquire and guide the process.

And in most criminal cases there are jurors, called "lay judges".

The court is set up in such a way that at least one lay judge has to concur with a conviction (because of majority rules). So there is also a safety valve where "the common people" can stop oppressive prosecution.

Bayes rule should be taught before handing out highschool diplomas.

Differential calculus, trigonometry, and even geometry can wait. They are interesting topics, but statistics (with bayes) is something that is immediately applicable to typical situations encountered by the average citizen.

The should be taught what it means for a DNA test to be 99% accurate or at least it shouldn't be out of order for a lawyer to explain that as is currently the case.

Why should there be a few lessons by someone impartial on the subject matter? At the moment the system relies on expert witnesses who are called by one side or the other with an agenda.