[VetoBill]

Excellent post. I have heard instances of judges instructing juries to base their decision on the law, not on the law itself. In fact I have read stories where judges have become quite incensed if juries try to nullify a law. Does anyone have any links, facts to support these allegations?

[supercat]

Excellent post. I have heard instances of judges instructing juries to base their decision on the law, not on the law itself. In fact I have read stories where judges have become quite incensed if juries try to nullify a law. Does anyone have any links, facts to support these allegations?

Worse, there have been cases where judges have told jurors that they are to decide a case based upon what was actually their own 'interpretation' of the law, even when such interpretation is found neither in statute nor in any other court precedent.

[woollyone]

If you go to the FIJA site here There are some interesting stories.

The judge's instructions are not an oath (regardless of what the judge says about the issue), but only guidelines. Generally, they try to intimidate jurors. IIRC, jury nulification in the North helped turn the tide in the slave issue, though later, the judges tried to get around these problems.

[Tauzero]

"Excellent post. I have heard instances of judges instructing juries to base their decision on the law, not on the law itself. In fact I have read stories where judges have become quite incensed if juries try to nullify a law. Does anyone have any links, facts to support these allegations?"

Absolutely. When I served on a jury in Dane county, Wisconsin, I had to take an oath to that effect.