Fair enough, but what exactly would you do in a case of a judges giving improper instructions to a jury and the prosecutor and your defender do not interject? As a defendant what's you next step?
[Sorry, I just realized that georg jetson's question wasn't directed to me. I'll leave the response below in place anyway, in the hopes that it might foster further discussion.]
Fair question.
Were I the defendant, I would have driven an elbow into my defense counsel's ribs and say, "Hey, stupid, that (the judge's instruction) isn't right, and it's going to send me to prison. OBJECT NOW."
If the lawyer was unresponsive (which I doubt, I have a big elbow :lol
, I'd stand up myself and object.
Judges don't like it when the defendant personally injects himself in a case, but the objection still goes into the record, and it pretty much forces a bench meeting between the judge, the lawyers for each side, and his clerks, to make sure they aren't about to embarrass themselves.
Of course, in this particular case the defendant might still have been found guilty, even with a correct instruction. The point is we just don't know, because the incorrect instruction eliminated any chance of finding out.
But, really, in a practical sense I would have sat down with my lawyer long before the jury instruction phase of the trial and talked with him about it. What instruction do we want (in most jurisdiction each side proffers their own drafted instructions)? What elements are key to us? What would absolutely trigger us to make an objection to preserve the matter for appeal?
I wouldn't plan to win a gun fight if I'd never even considered holding a gun before, and I wouldn't plan on winning a legal fight if I'd never even considered thinking about the law before.
Therefore I learned how to handle a gun, and I learned about the law of self defense.
And I think all armed citizens should do the same.
Best,
Andrew