Jury nullification.

Law trumps freedom to them. To the rest of us that is unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you this Danzig. Since here is a clear process set forth for changing/challenging a law, don't you have an obligation to try this BEFORE you start in with measures that DO violate the law?
 
Stage 2, I agree in theory..but as the saying goes, "if voting worked..it would be illegal." Working within the system unless you have money and lobbyists to speak on your behalf it is next to impossible to work within the system and expect change.

Even when we vote our conscience, those politicians we think are best for the job tend to sell out to monied interests and lobbyists who write the laws that continue to chip away at our freedoms, making next to impossible for the average man to fight the system.

As has already been pointed out, those with the power have enough money to keep it, while those of us who would fight against them do not have the financial resources to overcome the current power structure.

Hence the need to act outside the law to gain justice.
 
ignorance is strength
war is peace
freedom is slavery
Click to expand...

I think ol Georgie left out the one I gave ya :).

the rule of law is freedom"
Click to expand...

You really dont think so...really...all kidding aside :)

Some have the stones to thwart an immoral law. Others choose to couch their cowardice as an acceptance of bogus pronunciamentos of the political class. The reality?
Some are patriots and some are cowards.
Click to expand...

Tell us what immoral laws thou hast thwarted lately...and/or even better, give ma an immoral law

WildtakealoadoffannietakealoadforfreeoverandoverinmecabezaAlaska
 
As has already been pointed out, those with the power have enough money to keep it, while those of us who would fight against them do not have the financial resources to overcome the current power structure.
Click to expand...

BS, this is america, ANYONE can make a difference.

WildjustinvolvesworkAlaska
 
Some are patriots and some are cowards. AMF.
Click to expand...

A little harsh, Mister_Dinky. Some have more faith in government than others. I believe the folks in DC grow more distant from the people, and what the Founding Fathers envisioned, everyday. The answer? I don't know. We're not having much luck voting them out and their solution to bad laws is to pass even more bad laws.:(

badbob
 
quote from Wildalaska: BS, this is america, ANYONE can make a difference.



my response: Oh yeah...right...by using such tactics as Jury Nullification.
 
by using such tactics as Jury Nullification.
Click to expand...

A tactic which we have already determined in most cases is contemptuous, requires lying under oath, theoretically makes little difference in the big picture and really doesnt even exist in a purely legal sense anyway.

By the way, anyone have a verifiable case of so called nullifcation that has occured say since 1980?

WildnicetryAlaska
 
:confused:

So I've been following this and i think I missed something. WA, from what I have read and from what other people have said, it seems that the courts weed out the people who support the defendent and would promote a guilty verdict rather than those who would base their desicions off fact and common sense.:( Please correct me
 
"the rule of law is freedom"?


ignorance is strength
war is peace
freedom is slavery
Click to expand...

To be fair, rule of law is one of the foundations of freedom. This doesn't mean that all laws are just though. It also doesn't have a lot to do with what we are talking about.

Incidentally, in looking at the wikipedia article on it, I saw that Thomas Aquinas said that a valid law was one that is for the purpose of achieving good.
 
WA, from what I have read and from what other people have said, it seems that the courts weed out the people who support the defendent and would promote a guilty verdict rather than those who would base their desicions off fact and common sense. Please correct me
Click to expand...

In selecting a jury, BOTH sides want to get folks "favorable" to their position...here is a simplistic example...say the crime is "rape" of a young man. Prosecutor wants high school educated Churchgoers. Defense wants college educated Wiccans (again simplistic, you get the drift)...if both sides know what they are doing (ie how to voir dire, how to use the voir dire to challenge for cause vis a vis excersize premptories), you will roughly get a jury roughly equal to each sides desired i life experience.

Whether the jurors use common sense and proper factfinding free of prejudice is a function of what the sides learn about the juror in voir dire

The key thing then to the overall FAIRNESS of the entire proceeding is TRUTH. if a juror lies about their feelings or intentions, one side gets screwed....that is a strike at the entire system.....

WilddoesthathelpAlaska
 
Ah I think I see what that whole jury nullification is. Usually means a mistrial is in order

WeedyesthathelpsthankyouWildihopethathelpsAlaskaWacker
 
Stage 2, I agree in theory..but as the saying goes, "if voting worked..it would be illegal." Working within the system unless you have money and lobbyists to speak on your behalf it is next to impossible to work within the system and expect change.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd say history disagrees with you. The 14th amendment, Brown v Board are at the top of a very long list of the system working out some of our worst injustices. Money and influence will always make certian things easier for certian people, but the beautiful thing about the law is that lady justice doesn't measure people by their bank account. Everyone is equal in the eyes of the law and thats the way it should be. My vote counts just as much as Bill gates.


Even when we vote our conscience, those politicians we think are best for the job tend to sell out to monied interests and lobbyists who write the laws that continue to chip away at our freedoms, making next to impossible for the average man to fight the system.
Click to expand...

When you elect someone to office you you are casting a vote for someone who you think is going to best represent your views. Your vote does NOT guarantee that anyone will vote a certian way, or that certian legislation will be introduced. It has never been that way and was never intended to.

You have no contract between you and your representative. He is not beholden to you in any way. Thats why we have elections. If they got to office based on false pretenses, then you can boot them out.

You can't cry foul because some congressman allegedly sold you down the river. He isn't representing "danzig", he is representing a particular district, and if he does his job well enough to get reelected, that means he's representing the district well enough to where most of the people are satisfied.

As has already been pointed out, those with the power have enough money to keep it, while those of us who would fight against them do not have the financial resources to overcome the current power structure.

Hence the need to act outside the law to gain justice.
Click to expand...

I don't believe this at all. But more importantly, have you actually tried. You yourself, have you tried. Have you personally exhausted every legal remedy available to you?
 
I have seen the public come out to a county commissioners meeting on zoning. Of the 50 or so people who were there only one or two supported the idea of zoning an unincorporated area of the county. The rest all spoke out against the idea.

I saw firsthand how the government places itself above the will of the people when the commissioners decided to zone that area of the county in violation of the property rights of the people who lived there.

The people had spoken and were ignored. On that day I became a libertarian because I saw how government has set itself up to be the master of the people.

I can say that I have seen the legal route fail.

If one of those citizens were on trial for violating the zoning ordinance and I had the honor of sitting on that jury..I WOULD nullify. The government failed..I would not.
 
quote from a FIJA pamphlet:

"Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or in any Supreme Court decision requires jurors to take an oath to follow the law as the judge explains it or, for that matter, authorizes the judge to "instruct" the jury at all."


Wildalaska or Stage 2, will one or both of you attest to the truthfullness of the above statement? Please keep in mind that I am not asking about what you think of the statement only whether it is a matter of fact.

If it is not fact can you please provide for us the part of the U.S. Constitution or which Supreme Court decision renders that statement untrue?

Thanks,

Danzig
 
Correct.

So what.

See F.R.C.P. Rules 24 and 30 and the authorites that these rules were promulgated under.

WildheadachetodayAlaska.
 
It just occurred to me what a pro-government double standard you advocate!

The government can pass any laws it wants even if not granted the power by the Constitution..

But We the People are strictly limited to what is specifically enumerated in the Constitution?

How exactly do you justify that?
 
The government can pass any laws it wants even if not granted the power by the Constitution.
Click to expand...

No it doesn't, and the government does have the authority to pass a law to require jurors to take an oath.

From article 3... Section 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

Congress has the authority to create inferior courts and to set the regulations and procedures governing those courts. Hence the section of the FRCP that Wild posted.
 
I'm no lawyer..so I'll once again defer to the experts.

Chapter 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures pertains to the Parties involved in the case. Rule 24 is part of this chapter.

Chapter 5 deals with discovery. Rule 30 is part of this chapter.

I didn't see anything in the F.R.C.P. pertaining to jury rights and powers.

Please point out how the rules 24 and 30 pertain to jurors?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top