Judge finds ‘increasing’ difficulty in seating marijuana juries

[CLANG]

Source: Raw Story

It's becoming more and more difficult to find juries that will produce a guilty verdict in marijuana cases, according to a judge in Missoula County, Montana.

"I think it's going to become increasingly difficult to seat a jury in marijuana cases, at least the ones involving a small amount," District Judge Dusty Deschamps said Friday after potential jurors refused to convict a Montana man for having a 1/16 of an ounce of Marijuana.

An April 23 search of Touray Cornell's home found several used marijuana joints, a pipe, and some residue. He's is also charged with the criminal distribution of dangerous drugs.

Cornell's neighbors had called the police because they thought he was selling drugs. The defendant admitted in an affidavit that he had distributed small amounts of marijuana.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/12/judge-finds-increasing-difficulty-seating-marijuana-juries/

---

This is very good news!

[CLANG]

1. Potential Mont. jurors stage 'mutiny' in pot case

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/article/Potential-Mont-jurors-stage-mutiny-in-pot-case-909518.php

MISSOULA, Mont. (AP) — Potential jurors staged a "mutiny" during a felony drug case, a Missoula County prosecutor says, and authorities worry the result will be viewed as a game-changer when it comes to future attempts at prosecuting drug cases in Montana.

Nearly all 27 Missoula County residents during the jury selection process on Thursday told District Court Judge Dusty Deschamps there was no way they would convict anybody of having a couple of buds of marijuana.

"I thought, 'Geez, I don't know if we can seat a jury,'" said Deschamps, who called a recess.

The case involved Touray Cornell, whose criminal history includes numerous felony convictions and in his latest case faced a felony charge of criminal distribution of dangerous drugs.

[Xipe Totec]

4. Jury nullification

Jury nullification occurs when a jury reaches a verdict contrary to the weight of evidence. Widely, it is any rendering of a verdict by a trial jury contrary to the letter of the law—that is, of an official rule, and especially a legislative enactment. Jury nullification need not disagree with the instructions by the judge—which concern what the law (common or otherwise) is—but it may rule contrary to an instruction requiring the jury to apply the law to the defendant in light of the facts in the permissible evidence.

A jury verdict contrary to the letter of the law pertains only to the particular case before it; however, if a pattern of identical verdicts develops in response to repeated attempts to prosecute a statutory offense, it can have the de facto effect of invalidating the statute. A pattern of jury nullification may indicate public opposition to an unwanted legislative enactment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

[formercia]

5. The People speak

Enough of this 'War on Drugs', time to spend tax dollars wisely.

You make a very important point.

[AtheistCrusader]

40. I was the first juror thrown out, on a crack-sale case.

Sorry, just can't do it.

I'm not going to convict a non-violent person of a crime of possessing or selling the wrong type fo vegetation, or extract from said vegetation.


Edit: I will also stop misspelling 'vegetation'.

[Xipe Totec]

41. I was once kicked out too

For pointing out the absurdity of zero tolerance drug laws, since most US currency is contaminated with picograms of cocaine and we are therefore all guilty of possession under zero tolerance laws.

[notesdev]

2. Here's a radical idea

how about not wasting anyone's time or money pursuing victimless "crimes" that exist purely to allow some to impose their beliefs on others, backed up by gun-wielding government goons?

[defendandprotect]

36. Agree -- and we need to have Americans understand damage corporate crime does....

not only to the planet -- but to humans --

[valerief]

44. No, I think they exist so a small group of people can make money off

slave labor in prisons.

[obxhead]

51. Some people enforcing those laws make a great deal of money

allowing some to break them too.

I think that is the biggest reason drugs are still illegal.

[Uncle Joe]

3. Good, kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, CLANG.

[CLANG]

8. Thanks for the Thanks, Uncle Joe!!

[CrownPrinceBandar]

6. Good and rec.

[TheKentuckian]

7. If you don't give a shit, you must acquit. Don't justify, just nullify.

[former9thward]

9. This is why it is important for people to get on jury service.

If you are not on a jury you can't stop these nonsense laws. Don't leave it to others who may be willing to 'go along' with the prosecutor.

[Mnemosyne]

16. Excellent points, former9thward! Welcome

to DU! :hi:

Glad you have joined us. :hug:

[MilesColtrane]

25. I agree, but I'm not going to lie during jury selection.

They have ways of weeding us out. (pun intended)

[Warren Stupidity]

26. you don't lie

you just interpret the question

[eShirl]

10. Good, maybe the DA will stop prosecuting such cases. n/t

[CLANG]

11. Kick - Nullify every jury against innocent drug users!

[Dappleganger]

12. It's supposed to be a jury of the defendant's peers...

if they don't think that weed is a big deal, it should stand.

[MicaelS]

13. I wouldn't vote to convict for 1 oz or under

I think marijuana should become just like alcohol. Legal, regulated and taxed. And I'm 53 years old.

[Dokkie]

14. i wouldn't vote to convict unless violent activity is involved

We need to set the courts straight.

[Vincardog]

15. BUT BUT BUT the cops make a point of being violent. Isn't violent activity always involved?

[Mnemosyne]

17. Another excellent point in this thread, Dokkie.

Welcome to DU! Glad you can join us! :hi:

[MicaelS]

20. Good point....

I should of said, with no violence, and no intent to deal.

[Johonny]

18. just give the Jury a little pot and they'll sit around for hours

[progressoid]

21. +1

:rofl:

[eppur_se_muova]

19. Awwww ... such a pity.

Maybe they can divert some cops and courts into dealing with dangerous criminals for a change.

[sarcasmo]

22. Legalize personal usage and free up the court system.

[CLANG]

45. And cut the crap about "an ounce or less"

Some people like to buy in bulk when they find some really kick-ass weed. I'll often by a QP at a time just to eliminate the number of times I have to go though the "find the dope" hassle.

But it's all for MY personal use.

[MilesColtrane]

23. Speak out about being pro-legalization during Voir Dire and you'll never be selected to serve.

At least, in Texas.

[duhneece]

24. I spoke up and said I'd use my right to jury nullification

I spoke up and said I'd use my right to jury nullification on any non-violent drug charge...and for some reason, I was not chosen. Fancy that.

[martymar64]

42. I spoke up during voir dire 2 years ago in Austin.

I referred to the drug laws as "fundamentally unjust" - I haven't been called for jury duty since.

[tridim]

27. Now to see if the judge can add 2 and 2 together and get a clue.

There's a reason he is having difficulty, and it's pretty obvious.

[KurtNYC]

28. the right to medicate your farm animals and yourself was considered

fundamental when the constitution was written.

Marijuana fell under prohibition in the 1930s with booze, coke and everything else. The call to "legalize it" is not consistent with history. It is a call to lift prohibition.

"..liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

[ProudDad]

32. Actually Coke was 1906...

And booze in 1919 (repealed in 1933)

Marijuana in 1937 after a racist campaign against the drug by the execrable Anslinger aided and abetted by W.R. Hearst and his M$M...

MJ Prohibition seems to have been ENTIRELY motivated (justified) by racism... Interesting history here:

It's all real bullshit though...the phony "War on Drugs(tm)" is really all about racism, corporate profits, justifying the police state and voter suppression...

===========================================

In the interest of full disclosure, I've been clean and sober for over 11 years -- my interest in this subject is political and out of a burning desire for Justice and Fairness...

[CLANG]

46. MJ Prohibition was brought on by big business

Because of the fear of what Hemp could do to the clothing, forestry, mining, plastics, and other industries that would be put out of business by a simple weed.

http://hempbasics.com/shop/cms-display/hemp-information.html

[ProudDad]

52. You're correct, that was probably the REAL reason

and the method used, just like one of today's most important dividers, was racism... :hi:

(Actually big business probably had a big hand in ALL of the prohibitions...)

[CLANG]

53. Yes - you are correct on that issue. Racism was used to turn the white public against drugs.

[ProudDad]

29. Jury Nullification -- two good words to remember...

"What is jury nullification? Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a verdict of "Not Guilty" despite its belief that the defendant is guilty of the violation charged. The jury in effect nullifies a law that it believes is either immoral or wrongly applied to the defendant whose fate that are charged with deciding."

When has jury nullification been practiced?

"The most famous nullification case is the 1735 trial of John Peter Zenger, charged with printing seditious libels of the Governor of the Colony of New York, William Cosby. Despite the fact that Zenger clearly printed the alleged libels, the only issue the court said the jury was open to decide as the truth or falsity of the statements was ruled to be irrelevant, the jury returned with a verdict of "Not Guilty."

"Jury nullification appeared at other times in our history when the government has tried to enforce morally repugnant or unpopular laws."

[ProudDad]

30. Nullification...

"If more potential jurors start turning down nonviolent drug cases, our drug laws will change," Jason Kuznicki wrote for the blog The League of Ordinary Gentlemen.

Jury nullification often happens when a law is perceived to be unjust. During alcohol prohibition, nearly 60 percent of trials were nullified by jurors. Nullification was also often used in cases involving the Alien and Sedition and Fugitive Slave Acts.

[ProudDad]

31. As another so rightly said--it's an unjust, racist motivated prohibition that should be REMOVED

[Wednesdays]

33. That's what "automatic" sentences are for.

:puke:

I once observed Oklahoma City city court...judge handed down sentences. First offense for pot: $700 fine. Another first offense (but was charged with other stuff, such as paraphernalia)--$1000 fine. That's for personal use stuff, not for trafficking.

[Can of Whoop-ass]

48. That's what Pete Wilson (R. CA)

Gov of CA told judge's in the '90's; the 3 strikes law is automatic. The Judges of Ventura County said, then you don't need us. The Governor wanted a guy to be sentenced to life for being a habitual criminal for stealing a $6 bottle of after-shave!

[ThomCat]

34. Is he admitting that is the goal, producing guilty decisions?

As a judge, isn't he supposed to be making sure that his court seats juries are 12 peers? In other words, 12 typical people who are neutral as close as can be arranged?

I know, through eliminations the lawyers are remove anyone who is likely to be biased against anyone involved in the case, or is likely to have very strong opinions about the subject of the case. So anyone who admits every having used before is probably off the jury. And anyone who really hates anyone who who ever used is probably off the jury too.

But deliberately trying to seat juries that you know will, or is even just willing to produce guilty verdicts seems a lot like ensuring from the very beginning that people will be convicted, and turning their defense into a sham.

At that point you are drilling down so hard, ensuring the presence a mindset requiring a strict interpretation of laws, putting so much emphasis on obedience (in the jurors, and in the defendant), that defense at that point becomes pretty much a sham.

The defense is basically going through the motions because they have the right to go through the motions, but the jury has been told that they have no choice but to convict, and that is what this judge is looking for, more juries that will convict.

All our prisons are over-full, and our laws are draconian, and it is possession of minuscule amounts that puts a lot of those people in prison. We can't afford these prisons. We can't afford to be the nation that criminalizes more people per-capita than any other nation on earth.

A well known, favorite tactic for setting up an otherwise innocent person is to police to drop a few marijuana seeds into their possession during a search. As long as we allow marijuana to be such an easy way to criminalize such a large portion of our population, with essentially no defense, this will keep happening. Power corrupts, especially when it is easy.

[nikto]

35. If summonsed to be a jurist on a pot case---LIE TO GET ON IT & then VOTE NOt GUILTY

Work within the system, that's what I say.

[nikto]

37. Marijuana possession...

...Should be treated exactly like oregano possession.

[CLANG]

47. That would be my advice

Do whatever you need to do to get on the jury, and vote not guilty. Fuck em all!

[DeSwiss]

38. K&R n/t

[20score]

39. Every person who ever tried pot, every person who has a friend or family member who has tried pot,

and every thinking or caring person period, should nullify juries on marijuana possession cases.

Hope this catches on, everywhere. Maybe then the politicians will finally do the right thing and end this war on drugs.

[Le Taz Hot]

43. Jury Nullification should become

a common association with all marijuana trials.

[Roy Rolling]

49. Have they tried

better snacks for potential jurors with the munchies?

[RZM]

50. Good news

Though Montana isn't necessarily indicative of the rest of the country. There's certainly plenty of anti-government types up in Big Sky country that see drug laws through such a prism. But it's still good to hear. The ball is definitely rolling on reforming marijuana laws.