Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The duty of the judge is to determine what law is to be applied in the case. The duty of the jury is to determine the facts to be applied to the law. When you declined to apply the law because in your opinion it was unconstitutional, you (1) lied to the court when you said you could apply the law, and (2) violated the oath you took when you were sworn in as a juror.
Either of these acts may lead to a charge of perjury against you. Practically, it is unlikely that anything can happen to you, since the sanctity of the jury room is very well respected. In the end, if you have no problem with lying to the court and no problem with your word not meaning anything (since you are making a choice to violate your oath), then fine. Frankly, if I was a juror hearing a case on the Fugitive Slave Act, I'd do the same.
I have no problem with determining the constitutionality of the law in question. that is the duty of each and every citizen that sits on jury duty.
too bad people like you just do not understand that. with citizens like you, slavery would still be the law of the land because nobody woiuld ever used jury nullification to delare people innocent.
also, my oath to protect and defend the Constitution is more powerful than any oath to a judge.
Was going to vote not guilty as the law is wrong in my opinion but the defendant changed his plea.
Some will not get this, but jury nullification is entirely legal and justified in some situations. If a jury feels that the person is guilty of the crime charged but that the law is wrong, they can vote not guilty and there is nothing anyone can do about this. I applaud you for taking a stand against what you feel is an unjust law.
I have no problem with determining the constitutionality of the law in question. that is the duty of each and every citizen that sits on jury duty.
too bad people like you just do not understand that. with citizens like you, slavery would still be the law of the land because nobody woiuld ever used jury nullification to delare people innocent.
also, my oath to protect and defend the Constitution is more powerful than any oath to a judge.
Some will not get this, but jury nullification is entirely legal and justified in some situations. If a jury feels that the person is guilty of the crime charged but that the law is wrong, they can vote not guilty and there is nothing anyone can do about this. I applaud you for taking a stand against what you feel is an unjust law.
I apologize for saying in another thread that you were full of hot air.
Yes, a murder case and the defendant was a gang member in South Central Los Angeles.
The interesting thing was that one of the juror's was a defense lawyer and he was one of two who didn't vote guilty initially. The other juror was a young kid, his first time as a juror. We deliberated for over three weeks, told the judge we were deadlocked but the judge rejected and told us to continue. The deliberation got down to a long emotional and heated discussion that was mainly between me and the defense lawyer. We finally came to a unanimous verdict of guilty.
Serving on a jury is a experience. I sat once, served as the jury forewoman, and it was a nightmare.
The case was about a black man for assault, battery and robbery on a white man.
While deliberating there was a black man and woman on the jury. The black man kept referring to the defendant as "brother". He would tell the black woman that it would be wrong to find "our brother" guilty and she should think about it. I asked the man and woman if they were related to the defendant because they kept referring to the defendant as "brother". They both said "no" and I asked them to stop referring to the defendant as their brother. I had to constantly keep the jury on track which was to be objective and weigh the facts/case as presented. It was a very simple case, but was dragged out because of these two people.
We were sequestered overnight in some crappy motel and room shared. I was paired with the woman. She was uneducated and I wouldn't have been surprised if she wasn't there just to collect the stipend. I don't know how she was selected to sit on the jury. She clogged up the toilet, which over flowed, and I was the one who had to call for maintenance. I was horrified as to what he pulled out of the toilet and I made sure that he knew it didn't belong to me!!!! Her personal hygiene was disgusting: no shower, didn't brush her teeth. Obviously there were two beds and I found her sitting on what was to be my bed next to my handbag on two occasions which caused me to become suspicious. No matter who I was sharing a room with they would be a stranger and there would be no reason to trust them, but she was giving me reason not to trust her beyond general mistrust. I had to take my handbag with me to the bathroom and put it under my pillow when I went to sleep.
thanks for the compliment, but I dont think I would ever be as good as Miss Wolfe is.
I still be lieve in jury nullification of most federal laws concerning the several states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I apologize for saying in another thread that you were full of hot air.
