Jury Nullification
Ever heard of it? Well, you should have. The Agitator writes about it in his weekly Fox column. Jury nullification is well defined by Clay S. Conrad in his book, "Jury Nullification: The Evolution of a Doctrine
"Jurors in criminal trials have the right to refuse to convict if they believe that a conviction would be in some way unjust."
And that's the truth, no matter what the judge or the lawyers say! When the judge tells you, the jury, that you "must" do something, he is outright lying. Why? Because he wants to retain his power! The primary basis of freedom and this country IS based on the idea that the people have the final say. As Mr. Balko says:
(1) Jurors can never be punished for the verdict they return, and (2) Defendants cannot be retried once a jury has found them not guilty, regardless of the jury's reasoning.
In other words, you can quite literally make any decision you want when on a jury, and you CANNOT be punished for it. If you ever get selected for jury service, know this and get informed! Check out the Fully Informed Jury Association and learn the REAL power of a jury -- but don't let the judge or lawyers know that you know you have power over them -- they won't like it one bit. Serving on a jury may be the last, great hope for this country. If you are called to serve, serve -- but feel free to ignore the judge as YOU are the one in charge, NOT him.
Comments
1
Good information to know Ogre. thanks
Posted by: Jay at August 01, 2005 10:30 AM (2FcUc)
2
If you're ever on a jury, just remember: YOU are in charge -- no matter what that judge tells you. SERIOUSLY.
Posted by: Ogre at August 01, 2005 10:35 AM (/k+l4)
3
Very interesting & really valuable to know. There's been a definate down-play to intimidate, there.
Posted by: Mensa B at August 01, 2005 11:40 AM (TOHVc)
4
Heh. Funny you should say that. We have a situation here in Palm Beach County that just reared its ugly head. A young High School kid skipped school with a girl. He was hauling ass through a neighborhood and wrapped his car around a tree, killing the girl. Seems the girl was a daughter of a cop.
So... it is coming out now, that two people on the jury wanted to vote 'not guilty' as they thought the penalty was too harsh for 'guilty' for such a young man... but someone on the jury said they felt certain that if they did not convict this young man, they all would be harrassed by the cops... for a long time.
It swayed them for a conviction.
Me? That would not have swayed me. I do not make my judgments based on fear like that. I won't be intimidated. But... it happened. A jury who thought they had no control. It will be interesting what will come of it now that it is under the light.
So... it is coming out now, that two people on the jury wanted to vote 'not guilty' as they thought the penalty was too harsh for 'guilty' for such a young man... but someone on the jury said they felt certain that if they did not convict this young man, they all would be harrassed by the cops... for a long time.
It swayed them for a conviction.
Me? That would not have swayed me. I do not make my judgments based on fear like that. I won't be intimidated. But... it happened. A jury who thought they had no control. It will be interesting what will come of it now that it is under the light.
Posted by: Bou at August 01, 2005 12:36 PM (5JHEt)
5
More than a down-play, MensaB, judges often incorrectly tell the jury what they can and cannot do. However, since people generally fear the judge, it continues.
Very interesting, Bou, as in that case, a mistrial can be called. The justice system we have is very, very interesting to me -- a guilty verdict by a jury can be checked, verified, put under a microscope, overturned, etc.; but an innocent verdict cannot.
Very interesting, Bou, as in that case, a mistrial can be called. The justice system we have is very, very interesting to me -- a guilty verdict by a jury can be checked, verified, put under a microscope, overturned, etc.; but an innocent verdict cannot.
Posted by: Ogre at August 01, 2005 12:51 PM (/k+l4)
6
The judge is disturbed. It only came out after he received a letter from the juror... I believe after sentencing. Not sure... may have been before. The cops are pissed and I don't blame them. The kid could very well get off because of complete BS in the backroom.
Posted by: Bou at August 01, 2005 02:31 PM (5JHEt)
7
I think the way you've described it, the defense lawyer could request an appeal and a mistrial. Then the whole trial would just be done all over again!
Posted by: Ogre at August 01, 2005 02:50 PM (L0IGK)
8
I'll keep your advice in mind if I ever get picked for a jury. I never get that far.
too ed-joo-kay-tid, I guess.
(*)>
too ed-joo-kay-tid, I guess.
(*)>
Posted by: birdwoman at August 02, 2005 09:51 AM (vR7Sl)
9
Just don't let the lawyers know you know!
Those inside the legal system absolutely HATE the Fully Informed Jury Association.
Those inside the legal system absolutely HATE the Fully Informed Jury Association.
Posted by: Ogre at August 02, 2005 09:55 AM (/k+l4)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.009 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0068 seconds, 17 records returned.
Page size 8 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.