TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote:"
But we do have a transcript of what the judge said, and I still think the judge was way out of line. had I been one of the jurors I would have told him so.

You might as well say "Throw me in jail and fine me!" because that is what would happen. As to the nullification, reportedly jurors told the defense attorney that they didn't think the defendant should of been stopped. So if that is the case the jury has no input on the RS for the stop, that gets handled separately, and as such it shouldn't affect the verdict. If it did then yes the jury is practicing nullification. They chose to ignore the proven guilt of the defendant because they disagreed with some other issue. The kid blew .92 so it wasn't that they wanted to give a little slack or were concerned about the accuracy of the test, they just wanted to find the guy not guilty.

WildBill wrote:

C-dub wrote:That is true, but the judge saw all the same evidence the jury did. If it really was jury nullification, I wonder why they wouldn't or couldn't find him guilty.

Apparently the jury didn't think there was enough evidence to arrest Tran in the first place.

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairp ... i_char.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well then unlike what Texas monthly claims it was jury nullification. They ignored the test results so they could find not guilty because they didn't buy the reason for the stop. The issue would be that they are not supposed to decide if the stop was legal, that was already adjudicated.