Comment on Met police arrest pensioner for ‘jury crime’ already ruled not a crime
yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks agoWhat precisely is the point of a jury if you’re going to constrain how they vote? Of course jury nullification could be bad. And of course it can be good. All legal systems are made up. The whole idea is to allow people — a jury — the freedom to decide for themselves.
FishFace@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
It’s not about complaining about how they vote. The jury doesn’t have complete freedom because that’s the aim; they have complete freedom because there’s no other way to do it and still have a the concept of a jury. They are supposed to follow the directions of the judge in terms of how to apply the law. Telling them, “no actually you don’t have to do that” is definitely dodgy, no matter the technicalities of how they de facto can choose what to do.
yeahiknow3@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
Legally speaking, jury nullification is real. Try to absorb this fact.
More importantly, when corruption is the norm, and other democratic avenues have failed, jury nullification isn’t just a legal option, it is the only rational one. Next comes vigilantism.
FishFace@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
Nothing I’ve said implies I don’t think it’s real, so I don’t think we have anything else to talk about.