The author considers the question of the jury as an institution of legal socialization. She has conducted a survey of attitudes towards crime and punishment. In this study she analyses (1) how these attitudes affect the person's willingness to join a jury, and (2) how they change as a result of reaching a verdict. The results of the survey show that those who believe in non-violent prevention of crime and rehabilitation of offenders, by contrast to those who believe in efficiency of intimidation, are more willing serve on a jury. Experience of serving on a jury leads to an increasing appreciation of the efficiency of non-violent prevention of crime in contrast to intimidation and rehabilitation of offenders. Yet, after having worked ona jury, a person has a slightly less favourable image of "a typical offender" and tends to disbelieve that the main objective of punishment is restoring justice.