|
|
#41
03-09-2007, 03:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
As a mathematician, I can calculate the chance that at least one person on a jury of 12 and would prevent bad laws from being executed. [/ QUOTE ] From the first article. He doesn't bother to tell you that if just 6% of the population does not like a law (DUI, spousal abuse, date rape), then there it would be better than 50-50 that a trial would end up with a hung jury if jurors were told they could practice nullification. Let's let 6% run the system. 
|
|
#42
03-09-2007, 03:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Specific Question for Howard Beale and Andyfox...
The problem I have with it is that my good might be your evil. And my evil your good. Suppose someone was accused of violating an affirmative action law by not giving extra points to a minority applicant for a job.
|
|
#43
03-09-2007, 03:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] As a mathematician, I can calculate the chance that at least one person on a jury of 12 and would prevent bad laws from being executed. [/ QUOTE ] From the first article. He doesn't bother to tell you that if just 6% of the population does not like a law (DUI, spousal abuse, date rape), then there it would be better than 50-50 that a trial would end up with a hung jury if jurors were told they could practice nullification. Let's let 6% run the system. [/ QUOTE ] Wrong, there is no one arguing against jury selection, the prosecution can still weed out those who may be to biased from the pool, what is being objected to is that the prosecution gets a greater advantage due to judges artificially reducing the pool in favor of the prosecution.
|
|
#44
03-09-2007, 03:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
John,
Justice is not random groups of morons following their "conscience" -- whatever that is. It's what happens when people follow the law, not when they think they're above it. Jurors don't get to do whatever they want. Being a juror doesn't make you king. You don't get to make the judge wear a funny hat. You don't get to sentence somebody to 11 years, if 10 is the maximum sentence. You don't get to convict the lawyers, or court reporter, because you don't like the way they look. Juries derive their power from the law, and they have no more power than what the law gives them. [ QUOTE ] it is a travesty that judges are permitted to instruct jurors that they must find a guilty verdict even if they disagree with the law, as long as the prosecutor proves his case. [/ QUOTE ] If a juror isn't going to follow the law, -- even if the prosecutor proves his case -- what's the point of even having the trial? Wouldn't it be faster to just ask if anybody disagrees with the law, rather than going to the bother of putting on evidence? Yes, of course jurors disregard the law. Lawyers will tell you stories about jurors who gave somebody 5 years instead of 10 years, because they thought "he might not be guilty." They're jurors who think it is better to convict an innocent man, then take a chance on letting a possible child molestor go free. And many jurors - no matter what they tell you - will, in the end, hold the defendant's silence against him. So, yeah, jury nullification definitely happens. But it's almost always a bad thing, not a good thing.
|
|
#45
03-09-2007, 03:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
Wrong, there is no one arguing against jury selection, the prosecution can still weed out those who may be to biased from the pool... [/ QUOTE ] You don't think, "I would never convict somebody of possession, because I don't agree with the drug laws" is a bias? Seriously?
|
|
#46
03-09-2007, 03:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Specific Question for Howard Beale and Andyfox...
[ QUOTE ]
The problem I have with it is that my good might be your evil. And my evil your good. Suppose someone was accused of violating an affirmative action law by not giving extra points to a minority applicant for a job. [/ QUOTE ] welcome to reality. it is better to have 12 talk about it in a jury room than people keep quiet and behave like puppets for the state (or keep their conscience secret and do evil).
|
|
#47
03-09-2007, 04:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Wrong, there is no one arguing against jury selection, the prosecution can still weed out those who may be to biased from the pool... [/ QUOTE ] You don't think, "I would never convict somebody of possession, because I don't agree with the drug laws" is a bias? Seriously? [/ QUOTE ] what about "i will do what the man in the black robe says to regardless of whether or not it is right or wrong"
|
|
#48
03-09-2007, 04:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Wrong, there is no one arguing against jury selection, the prosecution can still weed out those who may be to biased from the pool... [/ QUOTE ] You don't think, "I would never convict somebody of possession, because I don't agree with the drug laws" is a bias? Seriously? [/ QUOTE ] The point is that in jury selection the defense and prosecution should have equal opportunities. The OP is about judges biasing the pool in advance in favor of one side.
|
|
#49
03-09-2007, 04:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
Justice is not random groups of morons following their "conscience [/ QUOTE ] Well if people are morons not capable of making these decisions how are they to accurately judge if the prosecution has made the case or not? [ QUOTE ] Jurors don't get to do whatever they want. Being a juror doesn't make you king. [/ QUOTE ] Quite right, one juror cannot acquit a person, he can only give them the opportunity to be retried. [ QUOTE ] You don't get to convict the lawyers, or court reporter, because you don't like the way they look. [/ QUOTE ] This is stupid. It is quite clear that no one is arguing that juries get to decide who is on trial, or that one person gets to convict. [ QUOTE ] Wouldn't it be faster to just ask if anybody disagrees with the law, rather than going to the bother of putting on evidence? [/ QUOTE ] You mean that the public should be involved in deciding what laws are just or not? What a bizarre and novel idea, i wonder if it will catch on? [ QUOTE ] They're jurors who think it is better to convict an innocent man, then take a chance on letting a possible child molestor go free. [/ QUOTE ] Which is why its good to have 12 of them, and a defense attorney who gets an EQUAL chance at jury selection as the prosecution.
|
|
#50
03-09-2007, 04:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The Injustice of Rigged Juries: It\'s Routine
[ QUOTE ]
So the juries who have acquitted the KKK and others because they 'used their conscience' are fine by you? [/ QUOTE ] I don't think it's "fine", but I think the jury having the power to acquit based on their conscience is essential to having a fair criminal court trial, and is an essential restraint on potential (or actual) government tyranny. So while I wouldn't agree with the jury in the instance you offer, I would not take away their power to do so, because to remove that power would lead to other evils and would remove the last-ditch defense against government tyranny.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
