Rethinking jury nullification

WA Post ^ | August 7, 2015 | Ilya Somin

[george76]

Jury nullification occurs when jurors choose not to convict a defendant they believe to be guilty of the offense charged, usually because they conclude that the law in question is unjust or the punishment is excessive. When I first thought about jury nullification as a young law student, I was inclined to be against it. Yes, it could potentially be used to curb unjust laws. But it can also be a vehicle for jury prejudice and bias.

...

legal scholar Glenn Reynolds provides a strong defense of nullification. As he points out, the sort of discretion exercised by nullifying jurors has much in common with prosecutorial discretion. and can be justified by many of the same considerations:

...

As Reynolds points out, jury nullification is supported by longstanding Anglo-American legal tradition, and was considered a vital check on government power by many of the Founders. The case for jury nullification today is strengthened by the enormous growth of modern criminal law, which has expanded to the point where almost all of us are guilty of some crime or other (an issue that Reynolds himself has written about). In a world where almost everyone is a criminal, there is already enormous arbitrariness, because prosecutors can only go after only a small percentage of the many perpetrators. Jury nullification is unlikely to make that situation worse than it already is.

...

Reynolds’ column was partly inspired by a recent case where a jury nullification advocate was charged with jury tampering for handing out pro-nullification leaflets outside a courthouse.

[Carry_Okie]

I and others had great respect for it. Made for some pretty heated arguments in the cafeteria I can tell you.

I have been on a jury that convicted a defendant whom, upon reflection, should have had consideration of nullification. The offense was real but the damage was minor, and IMO the young prosecutor was simply out for a score on a tricky case. I would kick myself over it but for the fact that the perp was clearly an illegal alien, thus undeserving of the protections for a citizen. He should have been jailed until a hearing before a judge to decide if he would either be sent home OR (if we could contract with the Mexican government for them to maintain prison camps for illegals convicted of crimes in the US) sent to said prison camp in Mexico, even for those in transit to other countries.

[RandallFlagg]

Did you hear about that guy in Denver who was arrested for handing out flyers about jury nullification to potential jurors recently?

You’d have to google it. I’m at work and can’t look it up.