Quote Originally Posted by nun2sharp View Post
I am not a lawyer, but if I were on a jury and thought the law was being mis-applied for whatever reason or if I thought it was an unjust law I would have no moral issue in negating that law. The law is printed text, people are human and therefore of much more value.
You and me both.

Quote Originally Posted by mhailey View Post
A juror has no ability to nullify a law. They are present only to determine the facts. They make a decision on whether a fact occurred or not.

Matt
I get what you're saying, but something in principal seems wrong there; I know this is an extreme theoretical stretch, but say we were to have an overzealous corrupt power mad government and there was a law passed which called for the execution of anyone who was heard to disagree with whatever current administration was in office. Say the law was very cut and dried on that. Say someone was charged with breaking that law and tried. Say the FACTS confirmed that the person did in fact make statements opposing the current administration. On a jury, as a citizen, you're saying then that every member of that jury would be required to vote guilty? If that example is weak from a legal or realistic perspective, please let your mind wander then and come up with an equally wildly absurd, potentially dangerous but theoretically possible law and apply it here.

Quote Originally Posted by norman931 View Post
As a juror, you aren't the lowest in the food chain; you are the highest. Everything that comes after serves only to either confirm or refute YOUR judgment.
Very powerful statement, Norm. I can just see if you were there with Jefferson and Franklin you'd get a "hear hear!" from them!


Chris L