[linux-elitists] Elcomsoft not guilty

Don Marti dmarti@zgp.org
Wed Dec 18 15:34:47 PST 2002


begin Ben Woodard quotation of Wed, Dec 18, 2002 at 03:01:56PM -0800:

> From what I've heard and what Nina has personally seen,
> the members of the jury are not informed about their rights to nullify a
> conviction and in fact the lawyers and often times the judge try to
> convince the jury that they do not have the right to interpret the law
> but only pronounce guilt or innocence in a stict legal sense.

The strict definition of jury nullification is that the jury has
_no_ other reason to vote not guilty than that the law is unjust.

But in practice, the defense comes up with some defense, however weak
(I mean, come on, "willful"?)  for the jury to hang their verdict on.
If the same defense doesn't look like it would have worked if the
defendant were accused of breaking a just law, I consider the verdict, for
practical purposes, to be a nullification.

Jurors' Handbook: http://www.fija.org/%5Cjuror-handbook.htm

-- 
Don Marti
http://zgp.org/~dmarti
dmarti@zgp.org
KG6INA



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list