Jury Nullification: Why Every American Needs to Learn This Taboo Verdict

Yep, it came out that the prosecutor in my case had bribed and coerced and threatened witnesses, going as far as to travel 1000 miles to coach a witness into lying. The trial was the biggest goddamned sham I'd ever witnessed. It was absolutely shameful. The fucker didn't even bother to try run for re election, I destroyed him. His assistant ran and lost in a landslide


What comes a round goes around

I can give an example:

I was working in Pediatric ICU at Vanderbilt in the early 80's. A young child was brain dead on the ventilator, because Mom's boyfriend swung his head into the wall.

Boyfriend wasn't charged, and was sitting out in the waiting room when we heard a gunshot. The child's grandfather, a local pharmacist, shot the boyfriend point blank.

Pharmacist went to trial and was acquitted. You would be hard pressed to find 12 people in all of Nashville to find that grandpa guilty, but of course he was, according to the letter of the law.

Judges and prosecutors hate jury nullification. They will go to great lengths to keep people from understanding that jurors have the right not only to judge the law itself but exercise their conscience.

The reason the right to a jury trial is so central to a free society is because the jury has the right to overrule the government and nullify injustice. It also acts as a buffer between the state and the accused.

Jury nullification has been around since the Magna Carta. It isn't just about bad law. Although that is part of it.

There are examples on this thread of the many applications of it.

Juries have not just a right but a duty to make sure only people who deserve to be punished are. If that means nullification then thats what they're supposed to do. The fact that defense attorneys do not inform juries of this duty is related to the fact that all persons involved in the legal process are lawyers and all are sworn to support the same entity, the government. It's not that your defense attorney cannot inform the jury of the nullification process, it's that he doesn't have any incentive to."Good" defense attorneys have an acquittal rating below 15%, and it's because they don't do everything they can to win.

The conviction rate in the United States in 1960 was approximately 50% on felony charges. Now it stands presently at 97%. A big part of the reason for that was the supreme court ruling that prosecutors can engage in criminal activity in a prosecution and that qualified and sovereign immunity preclude them from being prosecuted or sued for criminal misconduct, so long as it was done executing the duties of their office. i was shocked to be informed of this by my attorneys..

How many American realize THAT?

exactly. The high prosecution rate is also two other reasons. The prosecutor stacks charges so the defendant is looking at some ridiculous sentence if convicted.

Also chances are the jury will be brain dead.

So what happens is the defendant is forced to make a plea deal rather than take a chance on a jury.

Basically it is extortion by the prosecutor.

Many are the most deceptive, malicious hypocrites on earth. I can't wait for their day of Judgment.

The way it was put to me is we could probably deal with blind justice, but when it's retarded and swinging a sword as well good people are bound to get hurt. I believe jurors should have to pass a competency exam before they can serve that proves they understand the rights of the accused and their duty to the state and to the accused.

How does the foreman of jury address this when the jury returns back into the court room?

Is it still based on a guilty or not guilty verdict?

Does the jury need to provide a note to the judge stating that law has been nullified and the case is dismissed?

Most lawyers are among the most deserving of lengthy prison terms ever to see the inside of a courtroom. You could put every lawyer, prosecutor and judge in the united states in prison and the rate of innocent persons caught up in it would be less than the cases they prosecute. they're all crooks, every slimy one of them. Any way it goes, YOU LOSE.

NO!!! The jury is NOT required to discuss how it came to its decision with ANYONE ,ever , at any time. they can if they choose to when the trial is concluded. No one in the courtroom can quiz them. the only thing that can be done is a poll of the jury, which is simply each member giving a verbal acknowledgement of his vote in open court.

One time when I got called to jury duty, the judge came out and said, nullification is not allowed in this court room. I thought in my head, hey fuck you, you SOB.

As a former juror twice, there are brain dead jurors.

Quite frankly, they suck and makes for a great deal of frustration, including serious hostile arguments and passing a note to the judge for one being biased and lying in the jury box during interview process.

That being said, at least I was able to get some to see the evidence was not beyond a reasonable doubt.

One case resulted in a hung jury, the other an acquittal.

Mention of nullification had them even more stupefied. Half of them couldn't even pronounce the syllables. Forget comprehension of the definition.

It sure welcomed a good bottle of Groth at the end when I walked away from those idiots knowing someone innocent wasn't locked up and key thrown away because of the brain dead.

Is nullification ever mentioned? If so, when and where?

How exactly is this suppose to work? Please explain it in clear & understandable terms.

It works like this..........

Lets say someone was arrested for growing a few cannabis plants and had about an ounce at their house. The State tries to portray this person as running a criminal enterprise and wants to throw that person in jail for 20+ years. If you on the jury decide that the State is full of it and don't agree with cannabis prohibition, you vote the person not guilty. If the entire jury votes not to convict that person and finds the person not guilty, that is nullification. I had a friend who had something like that happen. He had the balls to go to court and the jury
found him not guilty, therefore nullification happened. My friend said the judge was extremely pissed off and he just laughed at him. If people did this again and again, the law people are against is certainly nullified.

Last Edited by The Deplorable Ryan Cawdor on 01/08/2015 09:42 PM

Maybe I watched Law and Order too long, but isn't jury nullification just as it sounds? "Nullifying the jury"

Hence, jury convicts someone based on stacked evicence, but they vote guilty on emotion and not evidence then a lawyer and move to nullify the jury or the judge can too if the use of law isn't used to convict. Opinion?

Correct. If you believe cops, politicians, bankers, and judges are terrorists...you don't have to convict people who kill them.

Believing in jury nullification is also a great way to get off the jury duty list. 15 years ago I wrote down my views on a juror questionnaire form and have not been selected since. Real Americans who are not sheep very rarely get picked to serve on juries.

The bankers and corporation mafia have their fingers all over this, because of building all those new prisons and getting all the inmates to work for pennies on the dollar.

Money-Money-Money.

The whole prison system in North America needs to be fumigated.

The Law was made for Man...Man Wasn't made for the law...

NOW HE IS AS STUPID AS HIS NAME. A PRO JURY. HIGHEST BIDDER STUPID...

IT IS NOT NEEDED. WHAT HAPPEN TO NOT GUILTY...

Mentioning I understand the duties of a juror, including nullification if my consciousness demands it has gotten me removed from the pools of jury duty twice.

Easy way out of jury duty

Chills

The jury case was doomed because you had 12 people who couldn't even get out of jury duty.

This thread is the real deal and most worthy of its pins.

[link to www.law.cornell.edu]

If juries applied this in every pot grower/user case...

Are these the magic words to use to get out of jury duty?

No. Jury nullification is one of EVERY Americans basic rights.... If our govt. becomes a Tyranny, and you are held to the laws....you can rule the person is indeed guilty of the crime they were convicted with...but the actual lay is unjust...hence...jury nullification. The defendant is guilty of the crime,,,but the law is illegal, or unjust. 100% American,,,but is never discussed by lawyers or judges.. They do not want to let the people know their rights.....

not "lay"...should be "law"....

We should start passing laws that mandate judges in that jurisdiction for which the law is passed MUST inform every jury of the right to nullify,