I was a Prosecutor for 25 years. I saw nullification perhaps, I dunno, 5 or 6 times. Some Prosecutors loathed it. Others, like myself, saw it as seeing it’s foundations in the fundamentals of our Constitution and Founding Fathers. It is THE absolute, 100% last and best defense against tyranny. Guns? Give me a break. They have tanks, drones and technology galore. But nullification? That they can never stop. That is the one and only thing that terrifies the State, both local and Federal.
I and others had great respect for it. Made for some pretty heated arguments in the cafeteria I can tell you.
I sat on a jury that essentially went very south during deliberations. It was my first experience as a juror, and I did not do some things that I wished I had done.
If I could get a do-over I believe there could have been a mistrial for juror misconduct.
Having witnesses what took place during that deliberation, I question jury nullification. You get a few loose canons in there, and the situation gets corrupted very quickly.
I have no idea how often this sort of thing happens, because this is a secretive thing, jury deliberations.
The evidence didn’t matter. The jury foreman brought information in contemporary society into the jury room. None of the other jurors objected.
If Leftists wanted to, they could create havoc in our courts. I left that situation behind very unsettled about it.
When the OJ jury lets him loose, I’m against it.
When a thoughtful group of 12 stands up to government tyranny, I’m for it.
How do we get less of the first and more of the second?
“But nullification? That they can never stop.”
Actually the state has stopped nullification which is why you only saw it so few times in your career. They stopped it via the jury selection process. No one is judged by a jury of their peers anymore, but rather they get a least common denominator jury.
Whenever I’m called for jury duty I always get in some blurb about not following the judge’s instructions if I either don’t believe what the defendant did should be against the law, or if I believe that following the instructions might result in a miscarriage of justice.
I’m usually excused without either side having to waste one of their preempts.
The case about jury nullification that I learned in law school (I am not a lawyer) regarded Viet Nam war protestors, and the jury giving them a pass for trespassing. The lefties (and there were many) in my class were loving on it. I just bit my tongue, thinking, “your time will come.”
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.