Live data from Hacker News

A Juror’s Guide to Going Rogue

blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk

21–25 of 25 posts

Re: A Juror’s Guide to Going Rogue

#21

I’ve heard so many conflicting conclusions on jury nullification, with mini saying it’s illegal. Is that true? Is it illegal for a juror to stand up and say we should vote not guilty because the law is wrong, or the cause is just?

No, passing a law against jurors advocating for jury nullification would probably be unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. In addition, there are incredibly strong norms against penalizing jurors, except for clear misconduct such as taking bribes, or conducting outside research. Founder of Pennsylvania William Penn's trial sticks in my mind here for some reason. As a result, in the US, it does not vary by juri…

Why is it against the law to conduct outside research?

Re: A Juror’s Guide to Going Rogue

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, passing a law against jurors advocating for jury nullification would probably be unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. In addition, there are incredibly strong norms against penalizing jurors, except for clear misconduct such as taking bribes, or conducting outside research. Founder of Pennsylvania William Penn's trial sticks in my mind here for some reason. As a result, in the US, it does not vary by juri…

Why is it against the law to conduct outside research?

Because the result of the case is not supposed to be influenced by information (especially not information specific to the case) that has not been presented in court and the parties didn't have opportunity to address/challenge.

Re: A Juror’s Guide to Going Rogue

#23

I’ve heard so many conflicting conclusions on jury nullification, with mini saying it’s illegal. Is that true? Is it illegal for a juror to stand up and say we should vote not guilty because the law is wrong, or the cause is just?

> with mini saying it’s illegal In the U.S., it is illegal to advocate for it while on a jury. It’s also standard for potential jurors to be asked about it in an indirect way. As long as we have juries, nullification will exist. It’s a bad mechanism for the rule of law, however. And if a judge suspects nullification is afoot, they will generally call a mistrial.

I don’t believe this is the case. Please offer a citation. An attorney can’t argue for it but a juror surely must be able to or else it would never happen. Source: I’m a jury consultant and law student.

Re: A Juror’s Guide to Going Rogue

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, passing a law against jurors advocating for jury nullification would probably be unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. In addition, there are incredibly strong norms against penalizing jurors, except for clear misconduct such as taking bribes, or conducting outside research. Founder of Pennsylvania William Penn's trial sticks in my mind here for some reason. As a result, in the US, it does not vary by juri…

Why is it against the law to conduct outside research?

Court is meant to be an authoritative process. The prosecution and defence are meant to present "the relevant facts".

Outside that, too many jurors might be influenced by what a Kardashian thinks...

Re: A Juror’s Guide to Going Rogue

#25
Feels like a pretty unethical article on an 'ethical' website. They clearly have a bias on the issues of the cases which they didn't even need to mention.

CGP Grey did a interesting video on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqH_Y1TupoQ

CGP Grey claim now you know the idea you might not be able to use it.

There have been a few arrests of different people advocating for jury nullification (Which I think only applies if you talk to actual jury members, hence why the arrests happen outside of court houses) ie https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-crime-jurors/judge-to...

Post reply on HN