I've yet to serve on a jury but I know people who have.

My understanding has been that the role of a jurors in a trial is to apply the law one is being charged with, consider the facts known in the case as supporting the defendant's guilt or innocence in relation to the law which was "broken" by the defendant. The law is the law.

I'm confused by a pamphlet I came across called "The Citizen's Rule Book"

In a nutshell, the way I understand this pamphlet, if a juror or a jury believe that a LAW is unsound, unconstitutional, etc, they can declare the defendant not guilty regardless of how cut and dried the law reads and regardless of how clearly facts may implicate a defendant as breaking that law. In effect, a juror or jury not only decide the fate of the defendant in relation to the trial, but they also can decide whether the LAW related to the case should be followed or nullified for that case.

Is this true? I realize I'm probably using incorrect legal terms in my descriptions and maybe I'm way off base her and my interpretation of the role or rights of a juror are incorrect, but I'm looking for clarification.

Thanks.

Chris L