Posted on 12/13/2008 10:42:05 PM PST by freespirited
A jury's inability to condemn courthouse gunman Brian Nichols to death has re-energized efforts by Georgia lawmakers to allow a judge to consider capital punishment even if there's no unanimous verdict, as a growing chorus of officials says it's time to give the policy another look.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
It sounds like something may need to be done about jurors who come on to a case assuring the court that they are willing to impose the death penalty, only to admit during deliberations that they are adamant opponents.
Bleeding hearts will be the death of the Nation...SSZ
Sure and if a jury finds a defendant not guilty, the judge should be able to overturn that as well. Trial by jury is the cornerstone of any democracy. I’m not in favor of weakening the power of juries.
Nichols case is an outlier - its high profile makes it a poor example for driving policy changes of any kind.
What is interesting about the case (at least to me) is the fact that it is one of the very. very few that are brought as DP cases in Fulton County. The same thing applies to a lesser extent in DeKalb County.
These are the two largest jurisdictions in the state (and among the most crime plagued) but the prosecutors rarely find a murder case worthy of capital punishment. Of the 107 persons on death row in GA in October ‘08 only 7 were sent there by juries in Dekalb or Fulton. Together they have about 20% of the states’ population and (I am guessing here) a higher percentage of murders with aggravating circumstances.
In 2007 Cobb recorded 42 murders, Gwinnett 47, DeKalb 119 and Fulton 179. There is no seperate classification for aggravating circumstances. Together Cobb & Gwinnett have about 2/3 the population of their sister counties.
I am not in favor of giving judges the power to impose death on anybody they consider an “enemy of the State”.
Rare exceptions do not make the rule. And in every trial there are always two things being decided, the guilt of the defendant and the justice of the law. Juries are always selected to pick the dumbest people. Why do you think that doctors and lawyers and people with degrees are always challenged??? The prosecution does this as well as the defense.
Yea, I have always wondered about that. I have yet been chosen to go to jury duty, which is odd, my wife has been chosen twice since I have known her, but she is is intelligent as well. Maybe she fakes being dumb better than me. But she is a looker as well, so that might help, lol. I just think with the way the court system has been ran the last 2 or 3 decades, something has to change. I am not sure what, and I don’t thnk it should be the Constitution, but something!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.