Jury nullification - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
    • atomicorange@lemmy.worldEnglish
      221·
      16 days ago

      You don’t need to convince fellow jurors, you don’t need to convince the judge. Vote your conscience and shut up about the reasons.

      • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        301·
        16 days ago

        Actually, you kinda need to convince your fellow jurors.

        Hung jury is a mistrial. Mistrial means the prosecution can try again. (Double Jeopardy doesn’t apply to mistrials) If you were the only one who voted not-guilty, chances are, the next jury will vote unanimously guilty.

        Its very easy to get kicked off jury before deliberations, so what you wanna do is: After deliberations begin, try to covertly nudge your fellow jurors. For example, if the suspect did not say anything that’s a confession, say “Are y’all sure this is the guy, I feel like he’s been set up.” Make excuses on why he might not be the perpetrator.

        Only when you are sure that you don’t have a unanimous “not-guilty” then try to say things like: “But should we really convict this guy when the CEO that died was a horrible person?” Just try not to say “jury nullification”, keep making excuses on why you are voting “not-guilty”.

        If you manage to convince your fellow jurors to all vote “not-guilty” then the suspect is free. Otherwise, it just get tried again and its another roll of dice on the next jury.

        • atomicorange@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          16 days ago

          Ideally, yes, convince your fellow jurors. But if you can’t… a mistrial is still good. A new trial means a chance to change strategy with more information. Witnesses forget things, start changing up their stories. And there’s a chance the state will not retry - trials are expensive and time consuming, and a successful prosecution becomes less likely with each mistrial.

          If you want to vote not guilty, you can. For whatever reason you choose.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      16·
      16 days ago

      I will tell you what the jury orientation movie said (in San Francisco Superior Court), The jury is the last line of defense against injustice.

      And that tells me (juxtaposed to Blackstone’s ratio) that jury nullification is a duty if the law seems unfair, if the sentence may be too harsh or too cruel, if the standard of proof is too low, or if the rights of the defendant were unduly violated by law enforcement, the prosecution or the court (say, hacking the defendant’s phone without a specific warrant, or using an IMSI catcher to locate the phone without a signed court order in advance).

      Or if there’s already evidence of miscarriage of justice, such as law enforcement officers lying in court in an effort to secure the conviction.

      In the US our courts are already corrupt like nano SD cards, and they go through great lengths to choose jurors who will give them a blanket conviction without consideration of the fairness of the law. And yet if jurors are the last line of defense then it means it’s their responsibility to make sure no unreasonable law is upheld, to assure that no-one is sent into the (squalid, abusive) prison industrial complex if the wrongdoing doesn’t warrant such cruelty.

      • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        81·
        16 days ago

        Nah, depression already gets me out.

        If in the future, I’m no longer depressed, I still wanna go on a jury, ya know, just to experience a once-in-a-lifetime courtroom process. #Murica ya know 😉

        • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          1·
          15 days ago

          My experience in San Francisco was this:

          ²³⁸U: I mean I’m happy to serve, but my diagnoses are on record. I’m on disability. Do you really want me?
          Jury Pool Clerk: Are you a danger to yourself or others?
          ²³⁸U: That’s the bar? I just need to not be a threat?
          Jury Pool Clerk: <giggles> This is America.
          ²³⁸U: Fair enough. I’ll see you on Tuesday at… holy crap eight in the morning.

          In Yolo county, I called in saying I’m eager to serve but need a ride, and they immediate cancelled my Jury Duty.

  • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.mlEnglish
    37·
    16 days ago

    I love this community because shit like this gets posted all the time and I know exactly why without anything being said

  • WolfdadCigarette@threads.net@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    23·
    16 days ago

    Relatedly, speaking about anything that could disqualify you from a jury on your public social media can make it difficult to experience the inside of a courtroom. Remember to keep it classy online!

    • Drusas@fedia.io
      26·
      16 days ago

      But it’s also important to spread knowledge. Some of us can give up our rights to be a juror so that the rest of the potential juror pool knows their legal options.

      And if you are ever asked it when being considered as a jurist, no, you do not know what jury nullification is.

    • Localhorst86English
      6·
      16 days ago

      make it difficult to experience the inside of a courtroom

      jury nullification is cool. I am now immune to being trialed!

  • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
    4·
    15 days ago

    For anyone interested in the actual mechanics on how to do this:

    There are two things you must do in order to nullify:

    1. You must get on a jury.

    If you are called for jury duty, we recommend visiting our online guide Called for Jury Duty? to learn about jury selection and how to maximize your chances of being selected as a juror. It covers topics such as appearance, behavior, and how to answer questions during the jury selection process. Doing a little bit of preparation in advance will increase your odds of being able to save someone from being punished unjustly.

    1. Vote ‘Not Guilty’.

    If you have a conscientious belief that acquitting the defendant is a just verdict, even if you believe he or she has technically violated the law, there are only two words you need to know: Not Guilty.

    In recent years we have seen some people suggest that you must identify your intention to nullify in order to do so. PLEASE DON’T! That is one of the worst things you could do. If a judge determines that you are considering not enforcing the law (for example, if one of your fellow jurors complains about you to the judge), then even as late as deliberations you can and most likely will be removed from the jury. This most likely will leave the defendant with no conscientious juror ready to contravene the judge’s instructions to convict against their best judgment of what would be a just verdict.

    We recommend not openly discussing jury nullification during deliberations unless it is clear that several other jurors are also openly considering it. If there are too many such jurors for all of them to be removed and replaced by alternate jurors, then the most likely outcomes are either a mistrial or an acquittal. If it is just one or two jurors thinking along these lines and they can easily be replaced by alternates, the most likely outcome is that they will be replaced and the defendant will be convicted.

    While you can be removed as a juror even as late as deliberations for indicating your intention to nullify, you cannot legally be removed for expressing doubt that the defendant is guilty. Neither are you required to explain your vote. You can participate in deliberations by expressing doubts about the defendant being guilty if you have them, asking questions, listening actively to your fellow jurors, and so on. If you feel the need to explain your vote, you can say something general such as that in your heart you cannot convict the defendant.

    https://fija.org/library-and-resources/library/jury-nullification-faq/how-do-i-conscientiously-acquit.html

    A much more in depth guide:

    https://beyondcourts.org/sites/default/files/2022-07/Jury-Nullification-Toolkit-English_0.pdf