A reader sent me this video:
I have been hearing about Jury Nullification since before the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994. Initially I found it an interesting concept: Somebody gets prosecuted because of a bad law and the Jury comes to the rescue, ignores the evidence and the law and frees the Defendant. Ain’t that a story worth being part of?
But what the proponents of Jury Nullification do not tell you is how it can be used to abuse your fellow man. How many cases do you think we had in which the evidence against a defendant was so weak and the prosecutor failed to prove his case, but the defendant was found guilty anyway because he was black? The obvious verdict was ignored and a decision via Jury Nullification was given.
I know, the official definition is when it returns a Not-Guilty verdict only. That is a self-serving and naive view to obscure the fact that the process can be used to actually find somebody guilty with the same procedure. The process is simple: a Jury ignores both the law and the evidence (for reasons) and delivers a verdict outside the legal expectation of the trial. As painful and slow as it is, the best way (til somebody finds a better one) is to kill a bad law in the same location it was created: The legislature.