Skip to comments.Is Juror Annullment illegal?
Posted on 05/22/2005 4:31:57 PM PDT by knarf
Last night, during a "Law and Order" episode, the 'judge' said that juror annullment was illegal.
The judge flared back with a couple of her own lines, one especially being that juror annullment was illegal.
The setting for Law and Order is NYC, so my question is;
Is it true juror annullment is illegal?
Is it something peculiar to NY(C)?
Was the statement just another lie to eminate from the tube?
Unless the law's been changed, or the FIJA (Fully Informed Jury Association) has been putting out bad info, jury annulment is still legal.
I guess you mean jury nullification. That's when the jury believes that a person is guilty of breaking a certain law, but votes innocent because they believe the law is unjust. Just saying because some people think the O. J. Simpson trial was jury nullification. Not unless the jury thought murder was just duckie. . .
It is not illegal, although some people would like you to think so.
|A non-profit educational association whose mission is to inform all Americans about their rights, powers and responsibilties when serving as trial jurors.
www.fija.org/ - 12k -
Lawyer shows on tv should be illegal
A jury finding of not guilty, for whatever reason, is not subject to appeal.
Thanx for the clarification.
Tell the judge at your next trail that it is your duty as a juror to not only determine if the defendent is guilty or innocent but also to to determine if the law is fair and just. Watch the judge turn into the Tasmanian Devil, trust me, I know.
All findings of fact in the American Judicial system are supposed to be findings of the Jury. The Jury finding can not be overturned.
What the Jury can not do is find someone guilty, but the law unconstitutional, so in that sense, the legal community is right, there is no juror annulment.
"The defendent is innocent, if he gives back the cows."
Judge:"This verdict is improper."
"The defendent is innocent, and he can keep the cows."
Good way to get out of jury duty!
jury nullification technically is NOT legal, in that it violates the specific instructions of the court with respect to following the applicable law. HOWEVER, once a person is acquitted, that's it. The jurors have not committed a crime, but they HAVE violated their oath as jurors (in New York anyway) wherein they agree to follow the judge's instructions on the law. A distinction without a difference, perhaps, as the jurors can never be called to answer for their verdict, and any evidence of nullification is anecdotal rather than testimonial.
-A Judge Who Knows
As the Irish jury found "The man who stole the horse is not guilty"
Yes, use a Fully Informed Jury flier as a bookmark and I guarantee you will never see the inside of a courtroom as a juror.
I was a potential juror, and was excused because the defendent was prosecuted for display of a firearm to a "bill collector" on his own property, and the police arrested him for it in his house.
During voir dire I mentioned that as an Army officer I had used display of a firearm to prevent mutiny. The prosecution wanted 12 people who thought that display of a firearm was always bad, and got all 40 people who were exposed to my anectode removed for cause.
If I sit on a jury deciding a persons guilt or innocense possessing say , a couple of joints, and I think it's a frivolous charge based on (I guess, I don't know), the law that says a joint is illegal possesion, I can, while deciding, voice my opinion that this particular law is stupid and 'we' could find the defendent not guilty on the fact that 'we' in this case determine the law illegal?
I'm not a lawyer nor have I ever played one on TV, but I believe the voir dire process has turned our juries into nothing more than a "lowest common denominator" system. I think juries should be chosen on a random number basis, at least I would have a chance (like winning the lotto) of actually being judged by my peers.
No, you keep your mouth shut and steadfastly state during the jury deliberations that "The Prosecution has not proven the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt".
Excellent article, thank you for the link.