TexasCHLforum.com

speedsix wrote:...if it's spelled wrong, have we really been called a name...or not

If a husband states an opinion in the forest, without his wife around, is he still automatically wrong? :-)

SIA

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/21/opini ... .html?_r=1

The above is an interesting article regarding the concept of "jury nullification".

The concept here is that even if person is guilty of something under the letter of the law, the jurors are the
ultimate determinants of whether a person will be found "guilty" or "not guilty", and may vote to hold the
person "not guilty" if they want to. Although the judge may not like their verdict, the judge won't be able
to punish the jurors.

I once worked with a guy who was a "tax rebel", stating that the US government had no right to impose an
income tax. He provided me with a handout pamphlet making that case, but the more interesting pamphlet
that he gave me regarded "jury nullification."

The link above discusses jury nullification with regard to marijuana cases. But consider that you were on a
jury and some CHL was in the hot seat, being tried for something. If you felt that he was a good person that
simply was ensnared by the letter of the law, you could free this man by voting to acquit.

I like the concept that the jurors have more power than they think.

Since IANAL, I don't know how a judge's instructions to a jury just prior to deliberations would square with the
concept of "jury nullification".

Does anyone have any thoughts on this, or have direct experience?

SIA