Jury nullification is the term for when a jury declines to convict a defendant despite overwhelming evidence of guilt. This can be a form of civil disobedience, a political statement against a specific law, or a show of empathy and support to the defendant.
“It’s not a legal defense sanctioned under the law,” said Cheryl Bader, associate professor of law at Fordham School of Law. “It’s a reaction by the jury to a legal result that they feel would be so unjust or morally wrong that they refuse to impose it, despite what the law says.”
A hung jury, where they cannot reach an agreement on guilt. Can be retried with a new jury, and probably would be in this case.
Jury nullification, would be all jurors agreeing on a not guilty verdict. The case is over and cannot be retried.
I suppose that one out of twelve could hang the jury over and over and the trials would just continue forever if the prosecution kept deciding to retry it.
If all vote not guilty it’s called an acquittal.
Source: I have been a public defender in NYC for 15 years.
Right… And they would vote not guilty even though the guilt is obvious. Despite the evidence…
I have been penguine emperor of Iran for 38 year.
That’s literally the definition of jury nullification which is what this discussion is about.
Congrats on your reign btw. Sounds like a “Happy Feat”
Am glad that you realized the defenition finally. Good on you!
My liege… I suggest you devote a significant portion of this years penguin budget to reading comprehension. Be well!
You may go now
I let you have this win, seems like you really need it! XOXO
As much as you seem to need the last word.