Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Gordongekko909

State of Georgia vs. Brailsford (3 Dall 1). February 1794


94 posted on 02/18/2006 6:27:10 PM PST by SUSSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies ]


To: SUSSA
ummmm, that was sooooo 18th century...

Yeah, that's what I meant, that's the ticket...

100 posted on 02/18/2006 6:34:47 PM PST by null and void (before the darkness there's a moment of light, when everything seems so clear)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies ]

To: SUSSA
Explained by United States v. Moylan, 417 F.2d 1002, 1006 (4th Cir. 1969).

"We recognize, as appellants urge, the undisputed power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence. This is a power that must exist as long as we adhere to the general verdict in criminal cases, for the courts cannot search the minds of the jurors to find the basis upon which they judge. If the jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic or passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision."

Not a right. Not a duty. A power.

102 posted on 02/18/2006 6:46:31 PM PST by Gordongekko909 (I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson