I just got called for Jury duty for the first time (want info on Jury Nullification) - VANITY

[The FRugitive]

I just got called for jury duty for the first time.

I'm curious about jury nullification in case I get picked and get a consensual "criminal" case (tax evasion, drug posession, gun law violation, etc.). What would I need to know?

This could be my chance to stick it to the man. ;)

(Of course if I were to get a case of force or fraud I would follow the standing law.)

[Roscoe]

Last year in South Dakota, voters rejected the "Amendment A" jury nullification proposal, which was backed by the head of the state's chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

Surprise, surprise, surprise!

[Roscoe]

Cite? You mean the words of the Constitution

I don't see any mention in the Constitution of states being required to have jury nullification laws.

[archy]

Thanks -- I don't know if I am a legal eagle. It seems I don't know a damn thing about the law. To think, instead of all that education, years of training, and actually working to represent clients, all I really needed was a few hours to readthis thread, and I would know everything about the law.:-)

Well, an additional three or four year tour as a light weapons infantryman with the Army or Marines gives you a clearer picture of your constitutional duty to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, as well.

Other service carries the same obligation, if not quite to the same degree of specialization in the finer points of such jurisprudence, particularly those who enlisted for or otherwise arranged other alternative sinecures, though they too may have been of equal service to their country.

The attrition rate in that *lawschool* is uneven, but sometimes is particularly high. There is in Washington a wall of names of those who during the 1960s and '70s found that out firsthand, and who might testify as to the price of attending such courses if they could.

-archy-/-

[DAnconia55]

Your job as a juror is to determine the facts NOT, I REPEAT, NOT the law.

Jurors should acquit, even against the judge's instruction... if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty they have a clear conviction the charge of the court is wrong.
-- Alexander Hamilton, 1804

It is not only the juror's right, but his duty to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgement and conscience, though in direct opposition to the instruction of the court.
--John Adams, 1771

I consider trial by jury as the only anchor yet imagined by man by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.
-- Thomas Jefferson, 1789

Guess you know more than they do.

[Dane]

It's called a joke you humorless little...

Humorless little what?? You set up the premise(sticking it to the man, yada, yada, yada),

So excuuuuuuuuuuusssse me

For me not getting your "joke".

[Roscoe]

South Dakota Constitutional Amendent A: Jury Nullification
YES 23% NO 77%

[DAnconia55]

re:#68 Just curious, are you in the legal profession?

Please, that should be obvious.

He jumped up quicker than a whore dealing with a bimbo handing out free samples...

[savedbygrace]

How long has it been since you read Amendment X? It appears that you are either unfamiliar with it, or do not understand it.

[Roscoe]

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Nothing there about states being required to have jury nullification laws.

[savedbygrace]

It's the fact that it isn't mentioned that reserves the power. The power of the government is not implicit, it is explicit.

[Iwo Jima]

I know many FIJA types, and Roscoe could not be more wrong. "FIJA" stands for "Fully Informed Jury Association." They do not advocate jury nullification. Instead, they advocate that jurors be told the truth about their powers and responsibilities -- that they are the judges of the law as well as the facts and that there can be no recourse against them for any verdict which they render even if they choose to acquit when the evidence is such as to prove that the accused in fact committed the offense with which he was charged.

That a jury has the rights and powers that FIJA wants juries to be told about is not really disputed. What the opponents of FIJA maintain is that juries should not be fully informed about their powers because if they know what powers they have, they just might use them. I find should a condescending attitude inappropriate for our system of government.

[DAnconia55]

And Libertarians claim to be opposed to fraud.

Stripping away our rights to try the law as well as the case is fraud by the government.

We oppose the initiation of force and fraud. You can steal from a thief. And you can kill a murderer.

[Roscoe]

"Jury nullification is contrary to our ideal of equal justice for all and permits both the prosecution's case and the defendant's fate to depend upon the whims of a particular jury, rather than upon the equal application of settled rules of law." -- California Supreme Court, People v. Williams, 25 Cal.4th 441 (2001).

Different states have different standards.

[Roscoe]

It's the fact that it isn't mentioned that reserves the power.

To the states. Your house of cards just fell.

[Jhoffa_]

First, you're probably not going to make ti past the interview.

But, if you do then I would do as the Bible instructs us and render a fair and impartial verdict. Be as fair and impartial as you possibly can.

If, however the State should be wrong in your honest opinion I wouldn't tell them I was "voting for jury nullification" I would simply state that the case hadn't met the level of "beyond a reasonable doubt" in my mind and vote not guilty.

At that point screw if they don't like it. If you don't like my decision, then you shouldn't have put me on your jury.

So na-na.

[Roscoe]

fraud by the government

Backwards. A juror concealing a hidden agenda from the court is committing the fraud.

[DAnconia55]

I don't want to agree with anybody who mocks another Freeper behind their back anyway.

But using email to slander others is ok, right?

[Roscoe]

http://www.fija.org/sf_cle.htm

[DAnconia55]

Anarchy means an absence of law

Actually, no. It means absence of power.

Anarchy can't actually exist in any gathering of people greater than 1. (Despite the rantings of the black clad leftist teenagers who like to burn things...)

With 2 or more people present, one automatically establishes control and order, whether or not he even conciously chooses to.

Nature abhors a vacuum.

[savedbygrace]

"to the states or to the people."

Unless the state passes an amendment giving it the power, it is then reserved to the people. I say amendment because mere legislation could be challenged and, IMO, overturned.

This jury power has been well documented from the beginning days of this nation. Judges lie to juries to force them to do his/her bidding. This is tyranny in the courtroom.