Still not an option because jurors are not supposed to know about jury nullification and lawyers are not allowed in any way shape or form to suggest it.
There is in fact a current case in the UK, which is the legal system that the US has based itself on, in regards to a lawyer insinuating jury nullification during their closing remarks. The lawyer is being held in contempt and is now awaiting their own trial for that.
That’s why it’s important to mention it as much as possible outside of court so potential jurors know it is an option and that they can ignore instructions for the better of the country. It’s why I mentioned it. I’m not a lawyer but I’m not going to say someone is guilty of a crime if the law is being abused. I’d rather let 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent suffer.
Jury nullification
This is not the kind of case that goes in front of a jury.
Why not?
Because it’s a question about the constitutionality of whether or not they were within their rights to violate his.
This is a question for judges.
Oh I’m talking down the line if this ever gets to a jury trial. Not literally at this point.
Still not an option because jurors are not supposed to know about jury nullification and lawyers are not allowed in any way shape or form to suggest it.
There is in fact a current case in the UK, which is the legal system that the US has based itself on, in regards to a lawyer insinuating jury nullification during their closing remarks. The lawyer is being held in contempt and is now awaiting their own trial for that.
That’s why it’s important to mention it as much as possible outside of court so potential jurors know it is an option and that they can ignore instructions for the better of the country. It’s why I mentioned it. I’m not a lawyer but I’m not going to say someone is guilty of a crime if the law is being abused. I’d rather let 10 guilty go free than 1 innocent suffer.