Are twelve jurors enough to provide an adequate and fair representation of society for the purpose of determining an accused person's guilt or innocence beyond a reasonable doubt? Explain why or why not. Include examples.

yes, because of the wisdom of the crowd

Explanation:

crowdsourcing is an example

wikipedia: "Trial by jury can be understood as at least partly relying on wisdom of the crowd, compared to bench trial which relies on one or a few experts"

sweet number is around 11 (npr)

wikipedia: it's done by sometimes "taking the average over a large number of responses"

examples : Congress, supreme court, board of directors

the numbers are even higher.

explanation:

statistics have shown that more that 60% of test takers fail the first time and have to retake the test.