Jury nullification... legit?

mpg said:

That's why you have to lie before you could do it, which is another reason why I'm against it.

Click to expand...

The fact that you have to lie isn't the person that has to lie fault. Blame the prosecutor that won't accept someone because that prosecutor knows that you know you don't HAVE to convict and can actually base a decision on the circumstances leading up to the breaking of the law instead of just on the fact that the person broke the law.

Besides, its not lying if they never ask you about it.

Kal'Stang said:

Jury nullification has in the past been used to let white people that murdered black people go scott free.

Click to expand...

Yes. And it has been used to let black people who murdered white people go free. O.J. Simpson, anyone?

Jury nullification can be used for good or evil. Point is that our system of justice puts the power in the hands of a jury, a jury that in many cases is not allowed to see evidence that would help them reach an informed decision. Technically, the distraught father who murders the man who raped and murdered his child is guilty of murder. Juries might identify with that pain, with the grief of just snapping, and give the man a lesser conviction or even aquit him.

When the time comes that juries are TOLD what their verdicts must be as a matter of law, then we should be afraid. Be very afraid.

MaggieD said:

Excon said:

Just in certain circumstances?
But for that to happen - Make it illegal for a murder charge. The gov would have to allow it's use. And I do not see that happening.

Click to expand...

Courts cannot make jury nullification illegal. I don't think it's that unusual for there to be hung juries because one or several people are using jury nullification to reach their verdicts. They just don't say it out loud.

Click to expand...

That doesn't negate what I said. The government would have to allow it's use then.
As in codify it.

I can't believe that someone thinks OJ was a case of jury nullification.

Excon said:

That doesn't negate what I said. The government would have to allow it's use then.
As in codify it.

Click to expand...

The government doesn't want to codify it or allow it. Jury nullification allows the people to decide if a law is just or not and that in essense takes power away from the government. No government wants that. They all hoard power and are always grasping for more. But the great thing about jury nullification is that with a system such as ours it is impossible to legislate it away.

Actually I find the ability of the little people to use jury nullification to be ironic and amusing considering why juries first came about. You should look up the history of it, I think you'll find it amusing.

Excon said:

I can't believe that someone thinks OJ was a case of jury nullification.

Click to expand...

Actually lots of people do. I've seen lots of articles talking about it. I'm sure if you do a google search of "OJ Simpson + jury nullification" you'll find em too.

Kal'Stang said:

The government doesn't want to codify it or allow it. Jury nullification allows the people to decide if a law is just or not and that in essense takes power away from the government. No government wants that. They all hoard power and are always grasping for more. But the great thing about jury nullification is that with a system such as ours it is impossible to legislate it away.

Click to expand...

Exactly. Which is why you have to take the good with the bad in this case.
To disallow it's use in one instance, means you have to codify it. And thereby allowing it in all others unless totally disallowed.