The acquittal of Corryn Rayney's husband, Lloyd, of her murder after a three month trial has sparked debate about whether all criminally accused should have the right to opt for a trial without a jury.

In his verdict, Justice Brian Martin spent 45 minutes giving his reasons for acquitting Mr Rayney of murder and manslaughter, saying the prosecution case was beset by improbabilities and uncertainties and that crucial evidence was lacking.

Justice Martin, a retired Chief Justice of the Northern Territory, was specially appointed to hear Mr Rayney's trial without a jury.

High profile Perth criminal barrister Tom Percy says he believes all defendants should have the right to request a judge alone trial if they wish it.

"[In WA] under the criminal procedure act there is the requirement that a judge needs to be satisfied before he can give you a trial by judge alone," Mr Percy said.

"Essentially it needs to be in the interests of justice and there needs to be certain other requirements fulfilled."

"I've always been one who thought that the jury was the best chance of a fair trial and your best chance of an acquittal."

"But I think in the current climate there is a lot of feeling about crime. There are a lot of people who are affected by crime and a lot of people who are opinionated about it and a lot of prejudice runs very deep."

"Whilst juries are told not be prejudiced against an accused person my bitter experience is that many times they appear to do that. In cases where there should have been acquittals, there haven't been."

Mr Percy says it's particularly difficult in cases where evidence is only circumstantial.

"If there is a version of events that sits comfortable with innocence, not withstanding there is a strong feeling that the person might be guilty, then you have to go the other way and invoke the presumption of innocence."

"Jurors find that very difficult in my experience."

Peter Mickelberg, who was wrongly convicted of conspiracy to commit fraud in what was dubbed the 'Perth mint swindle,' spent six years in prison before his conviction was eventually quashed in 2004.

He contacted WA mornings to say he also felt the jury system could work against a defendant.

"This situation where you're tried by twelve people they call your peers is just not working."

"It's fortunate in this case that it was a trial by a judge."

"It's the DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions] that objects to trial by judge alone."

"The DPP view that's a better chance of getting a conviction [with a jury]. I think that question needs to be asked of the DPP."

Tom Percy agrees that the DPP appears to favour jury trials.

"The DPP seem to oppose [judge alone trials] quite a bit," he said.

"Sometimes they do join with you in your application. I think the prosecution are very keen to have juries because they know that juries think that the person probably wouldn't be in the dock unless they had done something wrong, and that the police probably would have prosecuted them unless they were guilty."

"My view is, like some jurisdictions in the Eastern states, where you are entitled as a right to opt for a judge alone trial, that should be a right in Western Australia, which you don't have at the moment."