• buddascrayon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          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.

            • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              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.

              • Sirdubdee@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                22 hours ago

                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.

                • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  20 hours ago

                  I don’t think you understand how much it is that jurors are not allowed to know about jury nullification. If it’s found out that they bring it up in the jury deliberations, or mention or even allude to it during the trial, they can be kicked off the jury immediately.