Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Ms. Toad

(38,607 posts)

16. If a jury convicted when the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt

Reply to reformist2 (Reply #10)

Fri Jul 26, 2013, 12:23 AM

Jul 2013

the judge can set aside the conviction, or it can be set aside on appeal.

On the other hand, the court can't retry someone found not guilty. So you are correct that jury nullification really only works one way, because there are at least theoretically failsafe provisions to prevent a jury from convicting a person who is legally innocent. People just don't realize that term doesn't mean what they think it means...

But the reality is that people who are legally innocent are convicted, serve time, and are occasionally executed all the time, even when juries aren't deliberately ignoring the law to reach a guilty verdict.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What's your view on jury nullification? [View all] Nye Bevan Jul 2013 OP

Debating between option two and option three. nt ZombieHorde Jul 2013 #1

I suggest we medicate and meditate pintobean Jul 2013 #2

I just finished my pizza, so the timing is perfect. ZombieHorde Jul 2013 #3

When you are an aggressive, bigot with a gun, you shouldn't be able to twist the law and get off. Hoyt Jul 2013 #4

OK, because of the Zimmerman case we have had DUers call for the end of the jury system, Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #6

As long as it's there, use it for murderous bigots with guns. Hoyt Jul 2013 #9

Get me on a jury in a drug trial, then ask me. Comrade Grumpy Jul 2013 #5

Why have laws then? GlashFordan Jul 2013 #7

Um, that is exactly what a jury does, decides guilt. morningfog Jul 2013 #14

Jury judges guilt GlashFordan Jul 2013 #18

Juries decide facts and guilt. morningfog Jul 2013 #20

There are reasons why a jury is given instructions GlashFordan Jul 2013 #21

Wrong question. JackRiddler Jul 2013 #17

I refuse to be part of a process that puts a man in jail for owning marijuana mick063 Jul 2013 #8

Interesting. I thought jury nullification only worked one way - that is, acquittal, not conviction. reformist2 Jul 2013 #10

That's what Wikipedia says. Nye Bevan Jul 2013 #11

nope - "A jury can similarly convict a defendant on the ground of disagreement with an existing law" DrDan Jul 2013 #19

I didn't know it could go both ways as well davidpdx Jul 2013 #12

A jury that convicts without a law isn't really nullifying, it's making up its own law, imo. reformist2 Jul 2013 #13

It's true. Convicting contrary to the state meeting its burden is not jury nullification morningfog Jul 2013 #15

If a jury convicted when the case was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt Ms. Toad Jul 2013 #16