Jury Nullification

[catlover]

In light of recent anti-gambling legislation, I think the following is relevant to all members of our community.

If you are ever a member of the jury in a criminal trial, you can refuse to convict, in spite of the evidence, if you believe a conviction would not serve the interests of justice.

The judge is likely to tell you that you must follow the law, regardless of whether you agree with it or not. This is simply not true. If you don't agree with the law, you have the power to return a verdict of "not guilty". And if you do, no one can do anything to you afterwards.

More information about Jury Nullification is available at the Fully Informed Jury Association. http://www.fija.org/

[BluffTHIS!]

Get a grip. Either play and don't worry about the razor slim chance anything will happen to you, or if you are such a nervous nelly, quit if it passes and don't obsess on far out scenarios like that.

[catlover]

Woah! Who are you to know my motivation, or to tell me what to do? Do you have a problem with informing people of this basic power?

[BluffTHIS!]

You mean the power to forswear their juror oath in the unlikely even your paranoid fear of being prosecuted for online gaming came true?

[catlover]

Ummmm . . . would someone please PM me on how to inform the moderator about inappropriate personal attacks?

[BluffTHIS!]

Use the rightmost button in the "Post Extras" line at the bottom of every post to notify the moderator. But I'm not attacking you personally but your posts, in which you carry a fear of prosecution to the extreme, and also incite citizens to an illegal act, which falsely swearing a jury oath with the intention of not convicting is, when the evidence would dictate conviction.

[tsrcess]

you know, authority hates the concept of "jury nullification." but, the concept exists and there is legal basis to it. i figure if one likes authority, one would be opposed to jury nullification....conversely, if one dislikes or is suspicious of authority, then that one would like the concept. considering what authority is capable of doing, i.e. iraq, vietnam, i'm a little suspicious....

[Jay Cohen]

Unfortunately most juries don't understand their rights as jurors. This includes the right to whatever they damn well please once the door closes. They are so enamores, maybe even intimidated by the surroundings that they take whatever the judge says as if it came down from the heavens.

As a juror you have the right to vote however you please. You don't need to justify it or explain it to anyone including your fellow jurors.

I wish in my trial more of the jurors understood their rights. I actually had a juror say to me on the street after the trial, "We wanted to acquit you but we felt the judge gave us no choice." All I could do was just shake my head.

http://www.fija.org//index.php?page=...ytxt&id=31

"Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or in any Supreme Court decision requires jurors to take an oath to follow the law as the judge explains it or, for that matter, authorizes the judge to "instruct" the jury at all. Judges provide their interpretation of the law, but you may also do your own thinking. Keep in mind that no juror's oath is enforceable, and that you may regard all "instructions" as advice."

"When they believe justice requires it, jurors can refuse to apply the law. Jurors have the power to consider whether the law itself is wrong (including whether it is "unconstitutional"), or is being applied for political reasons. Is the defendant being singled out as "an example" in order to demonstrate government muscle? Were the defendant's constitutional rights violated during the arrest? Much of today's "crime wave" consists of victimless crimes--crimes against the state, or "political crimes", so if you feel that a verdict of guilty would give the government too much power, or help keep a bad law alive, just remember that you can refuse to apply any law that violates your conscience."

"You can't be punished for voting according to your conscience. Judges (and other jurors) often pressure hold-out jurors into abandoning their true feelings and voting with the majority "...to avoid the expense of a hung jury and mistrial". But you don't have to give in. Why? Because..."

[What?]

Bluff is right. People are making to much of this. If it bothers you this much you may as well quit right now.

[bobbyi]

If the prosecuting lawyers are at all competent, I don't see how a twoplustwoer is landing on the jury for a trial for someone being charged with online gambling.