Jury Nullification: Essential rights every American should understand

[Bunnykid68]

How about some of these? Dumb Laws in Indiana. Crazy Indiana Laws. We have weird laws, strange laws, and just plain crazy laws!

 

[HoughMade]

How about this then? No man may seduce and corrupt an unmarried girl, or else he risks five years in prison. What if you were on that jury?

If that were the law and the evidence was beyond a reasonable doubt, I could vote to convict. However, is that the law or did the legislature determine that this should not be the law?

Jury nullification for "dumb" laws? Of course not.

What if I just don't think that people should sue for damages no matter how negligent a person caused horrible injuries? Jury nullification for all!

What if I don't think people should have guns so when the government seizes guns improperly and you sue to get them back and for civil rights violations I say- heck no? You shouldn't have guns. Jury nullification!

What if someone thinks blacks don't deserve the protection of law so I'll never vote to convict a white man of a black man's murder? Jury nullification!

What if I don't think the law is harsh enough so even though the State didn't prove the elements of murder, just manslaughter, I convict of murder. Hey, I'm on the jury, I can do what I want!

 

[hornadylnl]

If that were the law and the evidence was beyond a reasonable doubt, I could vote to convict. However, is that the law or did the legislature determine that this should not be the law?

So you'd have been one of the jurors that voted to convict those charged with violating Jim Crow laws?

 

[poptab]

It must be nice to not have to think about complex issues.

Something that may be a bad idea 99% of the time may be necessary 1% of the time. That doesn't mean we start acting like the 1% is the norm and we have to start telling juries to ignore the law. These crazy @ss hypotheticals with no basis in reality are the stuff of children. Be realistic.

I believe in working within the system. Promoting the idea that we should just ignore laws we do not agree with in situations that are not in extremis strikes me as the type of thing petulant children do when they don't get their way.

Here's a crazy thought, start winning elections; start getting laws changed; start winning, less whining.

To make it simple- if there is truly no other way to save a life from an unjust execution, I would indeed exercise jury nullification. I would not exercise it simply because i did not like the place the legislature had drawn a line.

Where you get the mighty tall horse there? Law school?

 

[HoughMade]

So you'd have been one of the jurors that voted to convict those charged with violating Jim Crow laws?

Where do you get that from?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Hough, what if we limited jury nullification to criminal trials?

 

[HoughMade]

Hough, what if we limited jury nullification to criminal trials?

Well, you know as well as I do that as a practical matter it exists and always will. I just have a problem with ignoring the clear law because of personal belief. As I have explained, in extreme circumstances, I would, myself, engage in jury nullification, but there would have to be an injustice that cannot be dealt with in any other way and an injustice that went beyond my personal preference. In such cases, it should be obvious enough that no judge need give a specific instruction.

 

[hornadylnl]

Where do you get that from?

You say a juror has no choice but to uphold the law. If you were on Rosa Parks jury, you convict, right? After all, the jury doesn't have the right to judge the justness of a law.

 

[HoughMade]

Where you get the mighty tall horse there? Law school?

Nope. Went to law school because I was already on a high horse.

 

[hornadylnl]

Well, you know as well as I do that as a practical matter it exists and always will. I just have a problem with ignoring the clear law because of personal belief. As I have explained, in extreme circumstances, I would, myself, engage in jury nullification, but there would have to be an injustice that cannot be dealt with in any other way and an injustice that went beyond my personal preference. In such cases, it should be obvious enough that no judge need give a specific instruction.

Like the glock fotay guy, you're the only one professional enough to handle nullification.

 

[poptab]

Well, you know as well as I do that as a practical matter it exists and always will. I just have a problem with ignoring the clear law because of personal belief. As I have explained, in extreme circumstances, I would, myself, engage in jury nullification, but there would have to be an injustice that cannot be dealt with in any other way and an injustice that went beyond my personal preference. In such cases, it should be obvious enough that no judge need give a specific instruction.

Unjust laws exist now and are causing great injustice. As we all know, an unjust law is no law at all.

Make no mistake, locking people in cages for possessing plants is a great injustice.

 

[HoughMade]

You say a juror has no choice but to uphold the law...

When did I say that?

Did Rosa Parks go to a jury?

Am I living in the 50's?

 

[hornadylnl]

When did I say that?

Did Rosa Parks go to a jury?

Am I living in the 50's?

Answer the question. Do you as a juror have the right to determine if the laws that discriminated against those of color are just or not? The law said it was illegal for blacks to sit at the front of the bus. If you were on Rosa's jury, would you have convicted her? 50's or not, it was the law at the time. By your arguments in this thread, you would convict her.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[HoughMade]

Like the glock fotay guy, you're the only one professional enough to handle nullification.

I honestly don't know what you are talking about.

All I have ever said is that jury nullification is a bad idea. I believe that generally it is. However I can imagine extreme circumstances where it may be necessary: me, you, whoever. I never said it was for me alone.

Life is not as simple as jury nullification is ALWAYS right or NEVER right. It's not one or the other. I hold the opinion (it's only an opinion, people, relax) that it is almost never a good idea and that engaging in jury nullification regularly results in disorder and unpredictability. It is much preferable to change laws through through the legislative process.

 

[Trigger Time]

If that were the law and the evidence was beyond a reasonable doubt, I could vote to convict. However, is that the law or did the legislature determine that this should not be the law?

Jury nullification for "dumb" laws? Of course not.

What if I just don't think that people should sue for damages no matter how negligent a person caused horrible injuries? Jury nullification for all!

What if I don't think people should have guns so when the government seizes guns improperly and you sue to get them back and for civil rights violations I say- heck no? You shouldn't have guns. Jury nullification!

What if someone thinks blacks don't deserve the protection of law so I'll never vote to convict a white man of a black man's murder? Jury nullification!

What if I don't think the law is harsh enough so even though the State didn't prove the elements of murder, just manslaughter, I convict of murder. Hey, I'm on the jury, I can do what I want!

WOW! Your a lawyer and you said something like that (first sentence). No wonder our justice system is so ****ed up. People with views like that are running it.

 

[HoughMade]

Answer the question. Do you as a juror have the right to determine if the laws that discriminated against those of color are just or not? The law said it was illegal for blacks to sit at the front of the bus. If you were on Rosa's jury, would you have convicted her? 50's or not, it was the law at the time. By your arguments in this thread, you would convict her.

Easy. No I would not convict. And no, I do not equate drug laws to that.

 

[HoughMade]

WOW! Your a lawyer and you said something like that (first sentence). No wonder our justice system is so ****ed up. People with views like that are running it.

Yay for seduction and fornication! The cornerstones of society!

 

[hornadylnl]

Easy. No I would not convict. And no, I do not equate drug laws to that.

Did you not say that the courts have said jurors do not have a right of nullification?

 

[2A_Tom]

Here we go again....

Please accept my apologies I posted that at the end of page 3 for some reason that looked like the last page then I noticed it went to 6.