Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

reason.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 449 posts

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#111

Post by scarecrowbob »

pdonis wrote: post #103
daenz wrote: post #6

Is jury nullification the ultimate trump card? From what little I know about it, it seems that if enough people in a community knew about it, they could 100% control what crimes are punished in that community. On face value, that makes a sort of sense intuitively, but obviously it has to be balanced against crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes.

> crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes. Who has the magical power to know which crimes these are that are "in principle clearly wrong" with such certainty that they can override the community's beliefs? We're all fallible humans and nobody has a special private line to The Truth.

I like to think that saying lynching black folks is "in principle clearly wrong" is one example where I am okay with thinking that I am certain enough to override a "community's beliefs" about what is right or wrong.

I don't think that this is a magical power.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#112

Post by Ma8ee »

pdonis wrote: post #103
daenz wrote: post #6

Is jury nullification the ultimate trump card? From what little I know about it, it seems that if enough people in a community knew about it, they could 100% control what crimes are punished in that community. On face value, that makes a sort of sense intuitively, but obviously it has to be balanced against crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes.

> crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes. Who has the magical power to know which crimes these are that are "in principle clearly wrong" with such certainty that they can override the community's beliefs? We're all fallible humans and nobody has a special private line to The Truth.

I very much hope most of us here think that lynchings for having the wrong colour of one’s skin is wrong, while history has showed that there are communities that don’t consider them crimes.

There are good reasons why we try to minimise how much of law enforcement that are left to peoples discretion.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#113

Post by gorgonian »

zapdrive wrote: post #110
makeitdouble wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think of this as an utter failure of the system, but lingering on this for a while: if the vast majority of citizens (= people who can meaningfully participate in the society) thinks lynching is a good thing, the jury nullification is only a step behind making lynching OK in the books for that group. Of course there could be upper laws blocking them from making it an official stance, but it really feels lik…

I mean, if "the vast majority of citizens thinks something is a good thing", shouldn't it be legal in the first place? Because democracy.

True but that works better when the lynchees get to vote with the same ease as the lynchers.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#114

Post by codefreeordie »

daenz wrote: post #6

Is jury nullification the ultimate trump card? From what little I know about it, it seems that if enough people in a community knew about it, they could 100% control what crimes are punished in that community. On face value, that makes a sort of sense intuitively, but obviously it has to be balanced against crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes.

A jury is the last line of defense. The state can not use it's power to punish someone unless they can find 12 members of the community who are willing to allow the punishment.

It is supposed to be the last, final defense against the perversion of the justice system into political prosecution.

The state can make whatever laws it wants, but it can't enforce them without the will of (some of) the people.

Probably worked, too, when populations were smaller and communities more cohesive.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#115

Post by pdonis »

scarecrowbob wrote: post #111
pdonis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes. Who has the magical power to know which crimes these are that are "in principle clearly wrong" with such certainty that they can override the community's beliefs? We're all fallible humans and nobody has a special private line to The Truth.

I like to think that saying lynching black folks is "in principle clearly wrong" is one example where I am okay with thinking that I am certain enough to override a "community's beliefs" about what is right or wrong. I don't think that this is a magical power.

The problem is that the people who thought lynching was fine had the same sense of certainty that you have. Which all by itself is enough to refute the claim that such a sense of certainty is sufficient.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#116

Post by pdonis »

Ma8ee wrote: post #112
pdonis wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> crimes that are in principle clearly wrong, despite what a local community believes. Who has the magical power to know which crimes these are that are "in principle clearly wrong" with such certainty that they can override the community's beliefs? We're all fallible humans and nobody has a special private line to The Truth.

I very much hope most of us here think that lynchings for having the wrong colour of one’s skin is wrong, while history has showed that there are communities that don’t consider them crimes. There are good reasons why we try to minimise how much of law enforcement that are left to peoples discretion.

> There are good reasons why we try to minimise how much of law enforcement that are left to peoples discretion.

I don't know where you're getting this from. Practically all of law enforcement is left to people's discretion. The people exercising the discretion just aren't members of juries in most cases.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#117

Post by dannyw »

tptacek wrote: post #31
Alex3917 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People drastically overestimate what will get you moved out of the pool. If you say in voir dire that you wouldn't vote to convict even if the person is guilty, you're not going to get put on a jury.

No, but you might be put in a jail cell overnight for contempt.

In reality, I don't think this ever happens unless you had a bad attitude.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#118

Post by eru »

nominusllc wrote: post #49
daenz wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reminds me of the killing of Ken McElroy[0] >In all, there were 46 potential witnesses to the shooting, including Trena McElroy, who was in the truck with her husband when he was shot. No one called for an ambulance. Only Trena claimed to identify a gunman; every other witness either was unable to name an assailant or claimed not to have seen who fired the fatal shots. The DA declined to press charges. An extensive f…

Sometimes it do be like that though.

The justice system is supposed to apply to all.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#119

Post by eru »

RC_ITR wrote: post #101
eru wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but keeping someone enslaved was not a crime by the laws of that time and place.

Yes, but how would jury nullification come into play there? A jury can’t decide to make something a crime, they can only choose to not punish a crime.

Yes. And whether or how jury nullification comes in depends on circumstances.

Re: Man arrested for promoting jury nullification wins federal case

#120

Post by eru »

WalterBright wrote: post #93
eru wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> From what little I know about it, it seems that if enough people in a community knew about it, they could 100% control what crimes are punished in that community. Only in one direction, I think. Jury nullification still can't render a guilty verdict, when the law says the defendant ain't guilty. (At least in principle.)

It's in only one direction, because a jury cannot form itself and pick a victim to falsely convict.

A jury can still falsely convict, but a defendant can appeal a guilty verdict.

Non-guilty verdicts are more final.

Post reply on HN