Doug_Nightmare
Active member
John Wesley Hall said:
-
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.
-
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.
John Wesley Hall’s Adventures in federal court in Springfield MO.
- Thread starter Doug_Nightmare
- Start date
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
But, did the jury know they had a right to judge the law as well as the facts? I bet not.
Doug_Nightmare
Active member
SCOTUS has not addressed nullification in modern times, if at all, though you may argue that time is ripe for an opinion.
I believe that this is the senior stare decesis; http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/06/16/14-50585.pdf. Popularized here, https://reason.com/2017/06/20/although-juries-can-acquit-the-guilty-9t/
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
Indiana's Constitution makes it clear that the jury may nullify.
Article 1 - Section 19. "In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts."
Article 1 - Section 19. "In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts."
Doesn't make kitty what SCOTUS opines about jury nullification.
That is one horse no court or judge holds the reins to. Jury decides the involved law is unconstitutional or just wrong, verdict innocent. Nothing the robes of any color can do about it.
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
There was this poor farmer that everyone knew. The poor farmer was liked by all. Though he was poor he would give his shirt off his back to anyone in need.
Then there was the rich old guy in town that no one liked. He owned half the town. He was known to take advantage of anybody’s vulnerabilities.
One day the old guy accused the poor farmer of stealing his prize pig. The town constable charged the poor farmer with theft.
At the end of the trial the jury went to deliberate. The jury wasn’t gone but 10 minutes. The judge asked for their verdict. The jury declared the poor farmer innocent if he just gives the pig back.
The judge was outraged and scolded the jury sending them back to deliberate as instructed.
The jury wasn’t gone for any longer than 5 minutes this time. The judge again asked for their verdict. This time the jury declared the poor farmer innocent and he can keep the pig.
That’s jury nullification.
Then there was the rich old guy in town that no one liked. He owned half the town. He was known to take advantage of anybody’s vulnerabilities.
One day the old guy accused the poor farmer of stealing his prize pig. The town constable charged the poor farmer with theft.
At the end of the trial the jury went to deliberate. The jury wasn’t gone but 10 minutes. The judge asked for their verdict. The jury declared the poor farmer innocent if he just gives the pig back.
The judge was outraged and scolded the jury sending them back to deliberate as instructed.
The jury wasn’t gone for any longer than 5 minutes this time. The judge again asked for their verdict. This time the jury declared the poor farmer innocent and he can keep the pig.
That’s jury nullification.