• 0 Posts
  • 7 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 1st, 2023

help-circle





  • Unpopular take but despite it being a popular thing, we want jury nullification to come from individual conclusions that this law does not apply despite the circumstances, and not because they know they can. Every study ever has shown that people who know about jury nullification tend to dismiss evidence more often, and are more easily deceived by a sympathetic/ non-sympathetic looking defendant. It’s not even a law, it’s the result of the fact juries can’t be prosecuted for their decisions so really they can do whatever they want. This is enough to know that technically you can “nullify the law”. That goes both ways, people can convict without evidence

    Saying the law doesn’t actually apply despite the person having done the thing the law says not to do is very different from saying the punishment should be nil. This could also keep you from ever serving on a jury and telling others about this in certain circumstances could be a crime. All the legal minds who looked into this agree it should still remain a thing, but it shouldn’t be told to jurors explicitly. When you serve you swear to uphold the law, so it’s tricky to nullify without purgery perjury except for very very special cases.

    This is not a good YSK, you should understand what the law is as a juror. You could in theory reword this entire post without actually using the term and that would probably be helpful, but super complicated to write.

    Esit: I’m team Luigi (in mario kart of course)