• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Regaining our rights through education and jury nullification

C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
sudden valley gunner said:
+1

The statist will always claim "safety", like the claim oh but a murderer will go free.

The bottom line is we are free to ignore the judges instructions and judge on our conscience, yes this means we get to decide the bad laws as a jury, not the legislature, not the governor, not the judges and not the voters.

I ordered the book "The Grand Jury" what a great read.
Click to expand...

I hate when you do that. :D

Now, I'm all burning up with curiosity.

Author? Publisher?
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Citizen said:
I hate when you do that. :D

Now, I'm all burning up with curiosity.

Author? Publisher?
Click to expand...

George J. Edwards. It was a discussion on grand juries here that got me interested in it. Researching I came across a great article by Roger Roots who mentioned it was still to this day the best book on it. Went to look for it, Barnes and Nobles had it for print to order. His references are very extensive, seems like half the book is reference and court cases.
 
OC for ME

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
A jury that "convicts" because they believe that killing is bad no matter the justification will find their conviction overturned post haste (relatively speaking that is) in a state that codified a castle doctrine.

GZ was not going to be prosecuted for defending himself. A liberal prosecutor prosecuted contrary to the available evidence anyway and the jury voted not guilty. Our resident agent provocateur needs to read the timeline of the GZ case a little more closely. GZ is no paragon of virtue, but the jury got it right after a judge allowed the case to proceed to trial.
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
OC for ME said:
A jury that "convicts" because they believe that killing is bad no matter the justification will find their conviction overturned post haste (relatively speaking that is) in a state that codified a castle doctrine.

GZ was not going to be prosecuted for defending himself. A liberal prosecutor prosecuted contrary to the available evidence anyway and the jury voted not guilty. Our resident agent provocateur needs to read the timeline of the GZ case a little more closely. GZ is no paragon of virtue, but the jury got it right after a judge allowed the case to proceed to trial.
Click to expand...

True.

No nullification was necessary for Z. This only went to trial for political reasons. He was not guilty under the law.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Because you replied to me on-topic. Every time that you do, I am going to make sure that everyone knows that I am not replying to you on-topic because I think you are a dolt and a troll.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 
F350

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
941
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
Originally Posted by Brent Hartman View Post
I have a simple rule. I will not vote to convict a person for any alledged crime in which there is not a victim that had their rights tangibly violated by the defendant.
Click to expand...

sudden valley gunner said:
Great rule of thumb.
Click to expand...

I can think of several that don't fit that category; tax evasion & selling drugs to minors to name 2.

I will not vote to convict anyone of a statute that infringes on a person's natural rights.
 
Last edited:
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
F350 said:
I can think of several that don't fit that category; tax evasion & selling drugs to minors to name 2.

I will not vote to convict anyone of a statute that infringes on a person's natural rights.
Click to expand...

Taxes are theft of your property. I would nullify that in a heart beat.

Selling drugs to minors should be a civil/state issue and not a matter of the federal government at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top