Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

AnotherMcIntosh

(11,064 posts)
76. Jury nullification never "sends innocent people to jail."
Fri May 24, 2013, 03:05 PM
May 2013

In a jury case, if a judge determines that an accused is innocent, the judge can dismiss the case at any time.

There is no way that a judge can determine that someone is innocent and have a jury act contrary to that determination.

If a politically-appointed judge determines that a strict reading of a criminal statute will result in a conviction of a accused, a jury which rejects that view engages in jury nullification when they do so.

Certainly! Dawson Leery May 2013 #1
Speak it, Brother Filner! Let's nullify marijuana prohibition. Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #2
And thats why the Fully Informed Jury Association exists! www.fija.org TampaAnimusVortex May 2013 #44
this is not SD proper nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #3
Jan Goldsmith is an ASS FreeState May 2013 #21
He is an ass, but I like Mike nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #22
New Hampshire - 2012 RainDog May 2013 #4
What are the charges against Chang? randome May 2013 #5
don't know all the charges RainDog May 2013 #9
Montana - 2010 RainDog May 2013 #6
If you believe that the law is unjust, you wouldnt get on the jury. The prosecutor will ask you rhett o rick May 2013 #7
Looking forward to the day RainDog May 2013 #10
Let's try to convince our Democratic President to back off. nm rhett o rick May 2013 #11
Petitions to back off marijuana prohibition RainDog May 2013 #19
He doesnt have to make a big issue out of it, just tell Holder to back off. I doubt it would be rhett o rick May 2013 #32
Better yet RainDog May 2013 #34
Sorry my point wasnt better presented. If Pres Obama was in favor of letting the states rhett o rick May 2013 #43
The "culture war" issues are where Democrats usually support liberal policy RainDog May 2013 #47
I once saw a judge do exactly that MindPilot May 2013 #12
I guarantee that will happen in this case. But it's not necessary. The prosecutor will always rhett o rick May 2013 #13
True, and you can always answer that in the affirmative. MindPilot May 2013 #16
Agreed. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #20
I agree but the discussion was about "jury nullification". I dont think that's an option. Sure you rhett o rick May 2013 #33
That's a distinction that I don't understand. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #35
If you believe the law is unjust, then you would be lying if you said you could convict. rhett o rick May 2013 #37
"You dont get to choose what reasonable means." Says who? AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #39
What the judge will say is that if the prosecutor proved that the defendant was rhett o rick May 2013 #40
So, in your opinion, the crime has one and only one element? That's not how it works. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #41
"So, in your opinion..." What? Are you telling me what my opinion is? We are way off the original rhett o rick May 2013 #42
And yet there are posts on this thread RainDog May 2013 #48
I would certainly be interested in the specifics. nm rhett o rick May 2013 #50
Jury nullification has a long history in this country, including helping to defeat the Fugitive AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #52
There is a question mark after the sentence because a question is being asked. I'm asking for your AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #49
Part of a judge's instructions may also include jury nullification RainDog May 2013 #56
That sounds wonderful, however, explain how jurors with that in mind get past rhett o rick May 2013 #59
I haven't been on such a jury RainDog May 2013 #63
Reminds me of Juror #8... nikto May 2013 #27
Yep. I saw that happen too. progressoid May 2013 #60
You guess is wrong. former9thward May 2013 #45
Explain how someone gets seated on a jury if they believe the law is unjust. The prosecutor will ask rhett o rick May 2013 #61
Jurors are not questioned by judges about their verdicts. former9thward May 2013 #62
Again, what would a prospective juror (that thinks the law is unjust) say when asked rhett o rick May 2013 #79
Prosecutors don't ask jurors if they think a law is just. former9thward May 2013 #80
At the federal level, the judges commonly ask the questions of prospective jurors, not prosecutors. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #77
Oh snap! nt Poll_Blind May 2013 #8
Colorado - 2012 RainDog May 2013 #14
When will Bob Filner understand how in truedelphi May 2013 #15
And damnation to we lesser proles for electing him! MindPilot May 2013 #17
I am very glad to hear about him. truedelphi May 2013 #29
Cannabis legalization is a winning issue RainDog May 2013 #31
Because I'm a fair and open minded person, I would like to volunteer for jury duty. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #18
Southerners have engaged in jury nullification on and off for years. Failing to convict a white byeya May 2013 #23
Yes. The issue of "state's rights" RainDog May 2013 #28
+ + - You tied it together nicely. byeya May 2013 #30
Jury nullification began much earlier in the North when juries refused to convict under the Fugitive AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #53
Ed Burns, Dennis Lehane, George Pelecanos, Richard Price, David Simon and William F. Zorzi Jr RainDog May 2013 #24
I would nullify in a heartbeat. (nt) Nye Bevan May 2013 #25
best vote i've ever cast in my lifetime frylock May 2013 #26
NYTimes: Jurors Can Say No RainDog May 2013 #36
So smoking a little weed warrants trashing the first amendment. I wonder what Geo.Washington byeya May 2013 #38
The War on Drugs was the precursor of the War on Terror RainDog May 2013 #46
Good for him! gopiscrap May 2013 #51
The DOJ guidelines for the discretionary enforcement of the law can be found here: AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #54
thanks for the link RainDog May 2013 #55
That prospect terrifies me. Juries should always apply the law. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #57
It is part of our judicial system's practices RainDog May 2013 #58
They did vote to change it. We don't get to vote on what the feds do CBGLuthier May 2013 #66
Nullification is a bug, not a feature. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #67
So you think people should've been convicted for harboring runaway slaves? RainDog May 2013 #68
I think that it should have been made legal to do so. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #70
But it wasn't. That's the point RainDog May 2013 #72
It also lets criminals walk free, and sends innocent people to jail. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #73
Adhering to current law also lets criminals walk free and sends innocent people to jail RainDog May 2013 #75
Jury nullification never "sends innocent people to jail." AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #76
rather a bit of a strident viewpoint for a progressive board CBGLuthier May 2013 #69
What, that juries should uphold the law? I'm sorry you think that's "strident". Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #71
Sometimes laws deserve not to be upheld. Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #74
Please see #76. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #78
WE get the Jury Trial from Magna Carta England Savannahmann May 2013 #64
There are times RainDog May 2013 #65
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»San Diego Mayor Urges Jur...»Reply #76