[kazinopartnerkae]

http://www.siliconvalleydebug.org/ar...-nullification


On April 19, 2012 New York federal Judge Kimba Wood dismissed an indictment against 80-year old Julian P. Heicklen for alleged jury tampering in the case against him for handing out materials to members of the public regarding the right of jurors to apply the historic doctrine of jury nullification. Nullification is the right of jurors to come back with a verdict of not-guilty even if the jurors believe that the defendant in fact technically violated the law, but the jurors conclude that the law in question is an immoral or bad law or a reasonable law applied in a discriminatory fashion.

In dismissing the case Judge Wood commented that a person violates the jury tampering law only when they try to influence a juror in a specific case pending before those same jurors-- but not for merely handing out informational materials (protected First Amendment activity) to members of the public who come to the courthouse for a variety of reasons--not necessarily related to jury duty. Interesting.....very interesting.

THOMAS JEFFERSON (1789): I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.

JOHN ADAMS (1771): It’s not only ....(the juror’s) right, but his duty, in that case, to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgement, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.

ALEXANDER HAMILTON (1804): Jurors should acquit even against the judge’s instruction....”if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty they have a clear conviction that the charge of the court is wrong.”

U.S. vs. DOUGHERTY (1972) [D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals]: The jury has....”unreviewable and irreversible power...to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge.”


Tired of nonsense in the Justice system? Get some of this going.

Now, the 80 year old that was charged, isn't someone I'd get along with. He's more worried about 3 strike and you are out laws......and the fact that too many niggers are in prison. HOWEVER, I can see some good uses for this.

[Kneeniasy]

Caught with a joint? Plead guilty, and take 5 years......or take it to trial, and put the state on trial. 5 years, at a cost of (x).....is that really what you want to vote to convict?

Child molester caught, but judge instructs the jury to disregard evidence (x-z)? Fuck him, hang the jury and let the state take another crack at it.

[Uttephabeta]

Another jury—this time in Polk County, Iowa—has nullified a state-imposed curfew that conflicted with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. In a strange twist, the prosecutor reportedly asked the jury to nullify the First Amendment in favor of the local restriction, but the jury chose to uphold the higher law. http://fija.org/2012/03/11/jury-null...r-occupy-case/

Interesting. Really.

The jury ruled that the defendant’s exercise of his freedom of speech on public property took precedence over a locally imposed curfew. In a bizarre twist, prosecutors had asked the jury to nullify the superior law, the United States Constitution, in favor of the inferior local curfew.


Hmm.......this is really sorta odd.

On one hand......the LOCAL place should be able to impose new laws as needed......on the other hand....peaceful protest and free speech are sorta protect FROM local laws.

This could be a good way to protect people from tyranny.

Or it could be a good way to bring about some type of 'social justice', and let murderers walk free.

I'm torn.

[YmolafBp]

I got jury duty. I told them anyone named 'Julio' is guilty. They excused me.

[Precturge]

I got jury duty. I told them anyone named 'Julio' is guilty. They excused me.

LOL!

Well, you were honest.

[Fegemiembendy]

If a judge can strike down a law why can't a jury?

[d1Bc25UP]

If a judge can strike down a law why can't a jury?

Thanks Archaeus.

You summed up my point much better than I did.


I mean the power to just 'declare' laws/rules/regs to be WRONG.......shouldn't be in the hands of judges only.

OTOH......I'd worry what a group of niggers in Shitroit would do, if juries were empowered too much.

[tramdoctorsss]

OTOH......I'd worry what a group of niggers in Shitroit would do, if juries were empowered too much.

If things weren't so bastardized and were as the founders intended that wouldn't be a problem. It was never meant for niggers to participate in society.

[SkatrySkith]

similar circumstances here, during the casey anthony trial - although perry had designated free speech zones (as if such a thing should exist).

perhaps he'd have fared better with a pineallas county jury.

A man who violated court rules by passing out pamphlets outside designated “free-speech zones” during the Casey Anthony trial violated two of Chief Judge Belvin Perry’s orders, the judge said this afternoon.

Perry found Mark Schmidter in “indirect criminal contempt.”

http://orlandocopwatch.com/judge-per...hlets-to-jail/

[Tilmbeinymn]

I think they need to keep jury trials. I may not always agree with the vedict, but that's the price you pay with this system. I may think different depending on the verdict of a trail I want to see, but it's a price that has to be paid for this system. I know why they won't allow certain people on a trial.

[CaseyFronczek]

IT'S BECAUSE SOMNE LAWYERS LACK ETHICS...


AND SOME JUDGES ARE MALFEASANT.