Kevin Brown wrote:
>> I have sat through jury selection where they have screened for
>> potential jury nullifiers by summarizing the law allegedly violated
>> and the infraction allegedly committed and asking each juror if they
>> had a problem convicting if the evidence established that the
>> defendant committed the alleged act.
>>
>> Needless to say, if you are honest and state that you disagree with
>> the law allegedly violated, you will not be selected.
>
>
> This sounds like they are doing the right thing. It is for the
> legislature to make laws, and the courts to enforce the laws. If the
> law is unjust, then the defendant can appeal to a higher court, but it
> is not the place of the jury to not convict simply because they don't
> like the law or agree with it.
It is true that it is for the legislature to make the laws. It is for
law enforcement and prosecutors to enforce them, and for the courts to
interpret them.
What is the jury's role? Historically, the right to a jury of one's
peers has protected the accused both from the malicious and arbitrary
actions of law enforcement and from prosecution under laws deemed by the
community to be unjust, either in general or in application to a
particular case. The authority of a jury to pass judgement not only on
the facts of the case but on the law(s) under which the case was brought
has been upheld since the 1700s in this country. Critics of jury
nullification say that it brings anarchy to the courtroom, and that it
is a two-edged sword, having acquitted white supremacists of hate crimes
in the south. That may be true, but it is also a protection of the
individual from a unjust laws and arbitrary prosecution.
The "letter of the law" can be unjust in the extreme. I can remember
back in days of yore, cops vacuuming out the shag carpets of vehicles,
and picking out the seams of levis, finding a couple of marijuana seeds,
and bringing charges for felony cultivation of the herb. A young adult
whose crime was to let a couple of seeds fall from a doobie was thus
prosecuted under the same law as a major drug dealer, and faced a felony
sentence nearly as severe as would be handed down for murder. Was this
just? Would it be appropriate for a jury to nullify in such
circumstances rather than allowing the a teenager to face a decade
behind bars with murderers, rapists, etc, for the crime of dropping two
seeds in his shag carpet?
>
> If you don't agree with the laws the legislature is passing, then
> either convince others to vote for someone else at the next election
> and/or write your current representative and let them know what you
> think. They can't/won't change what they are doing if they don't hear
> from people who disagree with them.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
>
--
Lee Einer
Dos Manos Jewelry
http://www.dosmanosjewelry.com
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change you mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)