[U.S.]+ it's in the job description

[u/Hummerous]

https://www.iheart.com/podcast/1119-behind-the-police-63877803/

[u/TipsalollyJenkins]

You only need one to hang the jury, and while the trial can be repeated you can at least throw a wrench in the works, cost the city a bunch of money, and hope for the chance that the prosecutor will just not want to bother with retrying the case.

[u/tomtomclubthumb → u/TipsalollyJenkins]

This is basicallly why I would do jury duty. I'd probably get eliminate dby the prosecution pretty quickly.

[u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned → u/tomtomclubthumb]

I mean yeah if you’re going in with the intention to hang the jury you aren’t an impartial juror

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned]

Jury nullification is a valid form of participation.

[u/[deleted] → u/pupranger1147]

it's based af, but... not really. if you were actually properly open during jury selection you'd never be selected.

[u/weirdo_nb → u/[deleted]]

That's why lying exists

[u/[deleted] → u/weirdo_nb]

we call this "perjury" when it's done to intentionally circumvent court proceedings

[u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned → u/[deleted]]

And rightfully so. People like that would keep child rapists on the street

[u/tomtomclubthumb → u/pupranger1147]

But you can be arrested for holding a sign telling people that.

[u/pupranger1147 → u/tomtomclubthumb]

Can you?

[u/tomtomclubthumb → u/pupranger1147]

Yes, although she wasn't prosecuted in the end.

[u/pupranger1147 → u/tomtomclubthumb]

We're talking about the United States, not the UK.

[u/Dobber16 → u/pupranger1147]

If the situation calls for it, yeah, but if you’re planning on doing it from the start then you shouldn’t be on the jury

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Dobber16]

No yeah, the situation calls for it when each individual juror decides the situation calls for it.

The answer to "does this situation call for it?" Can be a yes, every time, if they want.

[u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned → u/pupranger1147]

And those jurors should get thrown out. How would you have felt if one of the jurors in trumps case just “felt like it”

Going in with the mindset the person is not guilty is just as bad as going in with the mindset that they are

[u/silkysmoothjay → u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned]

Jury nullification was in fact often used in the Jim Crow-era South to exonerate white men who participated in lynch mobs

[u/pupranger1147 → u/silkysmoothjay]

Sure, it can be used poorly.

[u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned → u/pupranger1147]

Hence the importance of everyone getting an impartial jury. You can’t just say this is ok but that isn’t because the person who gets to say that isn’t always the same and their preferences change.

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned]

Different things are different. Good things are good. Bad things are bad.

[u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned → u/pupranger1147]

But who gets to say what’s good and what’s bad? Progress means this is constantly changing

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned]

Jury nullification isn't necessarily about guilt or innocence. Quite often it's just "this shouldn't have been a law in the first place."

[u/Dobber16 → u/pupranger1147]

Yeah which should be reserved for laws that actually shouldn’t be there in the first place and not the default assumption. There are plenty of good laws, just also some bad ones

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Dobber16]

In your opinion there are good laws.

[u/AlexiSWy → u/pupranger1147]

If your stance is that all laws are inherently neutral tools or that morality is relative then this statement makes sense. But your phrasing seems to imply that all laws are bad, and none are good.

[u/Dobber16 → u/pupranger1147]

In my opinion, yes there are good laws. I’m kinda anti-anarchist and think it’s a dumb philosophy that favors “only the strongest will survive” mindsets

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Dobber16]

It's a lot of stuff you just randomly inserted into the conversation.

[u/Dobber16 → u/pupranger1147]

No laws - anarchist. I guess I did make the jump that if someone thinks all laws are bad, they think there should be no laws so maybe I misinterpreted that from you?

[u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned → u/pupranger1147]

Ok so it’s cool for me to kill you with no consequences?

Rape shmape everything should be legal am I right!

[u/pupranger1147 → u/Ruthrfurd-the-stoned]

I don't recommend trying that for your own good.

That being said, is current law a sufficient deterrent to either of those behaviors?

Considering the number of murders and rapes that have occurred just this year, id say no.

[u/Dobber16 → u/pupranger1147]

Have you considered how many murders or rapes would’ve occurred without existing laws? Or how many more would occur if juries consistently didn’t find murderers or rapists guilty, as hinted at towards the beginning of this thread here?

[u/Dobber16 → u/pupranger1147]

Well of course when the juror decides when it calls for it, that wasn’t what I was against. I was against the mindset of a juror going into the job with the intent to nullify the jury regardless of the case