The World Awaits...

[VinVega]

Originally posted by rubicon
News said Wacko says he is going to stop sleeping with little boys.
Yea- Right- When pigs fly.

You know, that whole statement really bothers me. A 45 or whatever year old man should never say "Alright, NOW I'll stop sleeping with boys." I know there aren't any laws, but something needs to be done about someone being that screwy.

[Valigator]

Yea my boss was so mad yesterday he said he didnt want any of the news shows on while we worked.....but fabs would be an expert on how a jury is instructed and the perimiters of what they can do and not do...as lay people we all knew if it walked like a duck well you know...but I can almost visualize it now...parents who are star struck getting involved with this freak again....we all know celebs have a financial target on their back...Kobe comes to mind ....but the real trajedy is Jacko is a pedophile...and he wont stop...might slow down and stick with a few vulnerable targets ...but he wont stop.....so the state will be very hard pressed to charge him again...especially by Snedden...so ...even with all this money and time and effort thrown at Jackson...he will continue his nasty little habit...and the world will throw their hands up in disgust.....

[Nulle]

I will not even speak on this topic or there could very well be a rage set in that I can't control !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[fabsroman]

Val,

A jury is usually instructed pretty well by the judge. However, that does not mean that a jury will follow the judges instructions and sometimes personal bias plays a role. If anybody could figure out why a jury goes one way or another, they would be very rich. In fact, there are jury selection experts that some of the larger firms use for big trials.

In civil trials, and probably criminal trials (i.e., I don't do jury criminal trials), the judge has the ability to overrule the jury's verdict, but only if the evidence is overwhelmingly against the jury's verdict.

Our justice system isn't perfect and continues to be revamped, but it is a lot better than most legal systems.

Regarding Kobe, what makes you think that he was innocent and that this girl was just framing him for money. I would love to put a poll up about Kobe, Michael Jackson, Robert Blake, and OJ to see how many people think they are innocent, guilty, or just plain do not have an opinion. I believe the majority on this board would fry these guys.

[PJgunner]

One of the things that has bothered me is "jury nullification". According to what I understand, it is a Constitutional right. If that is the case, how in hell can a judge have the right to instruct a jury that they cannot use the jury nullification right, if they feel the law does not apply in a particular case? That judge has "Nullified" my Constitutional right to jury nullification.
I just hope I posed that question correctly. The only reason I bring this up is when I was in the selection process, one of the first questions the judge asked was if anyone believed in JN, and if so, please raise your hand. IIRC, there were probably 100 people in the prospective jurors panel, and only two were willing to admit they knew what it was. I just kept my big mouth shut. I got excused because of having an ex-son-in-law in law enforcement.
Paul B.

[Aim to maim]

Originally posted by PJgunner
One of the things that has bothered me is "jury nullification". According to what I understand, it is a Constitutional right. If that is the case, how in hell can a judge have the right to instruct a jury that they cannot use the jury nullification right, if they feel the law does not apply in a particular case? That judge has "Nullified" my Constitutional right to jury nullification.
IPaul B.

I'm not a Constitutional law scholar, but I'm not aware of any part of the Consitution that addresses jury nullification or makes it a right. Any lawyers out there that can elaborate on this matter?

[fabsroman]

http://www.greenmac.com/eagle/ISSUES...ification.html


This is a link to an article about jury nullification. I read the first half and it seems to be pretty good, but I have mixed feelings about jury nullification. Granted, I am sure it happens plenty of times without the judges or attorneys even knowing it happens.

[Aim to maim]

Thanks for posting the article Fabs. I read it twice and still failed to find anything that specified exactly which article or amendment addresses jury nullification or makes it a Constitutional right. The article reminded me of some of those written by folks who claim that that the federal income tax is unconstitutional. (I detest paying income taxes in light of what some of my taxes are spent on, but arguing that income taxes are unconstitutional is futile).
Legal babble as used by attorneys and lawmakers can sometimes be disingenuous, but quasi-legal fuzzy logic is even worse and is potentially dangerous.

I don't have terribly strong feelings one way or another about jury nullification, but I can find no evidence that it is a Constitutional right.

[fabsroman]

To be honest with you, I had never heard of it before this thread, but I do find it quite intriguing.

As far as attorneys are concerned, we try to take the grey areas in the law and make them even greyer if it benefits our client. Our job is to argue the law, and there are several areas of the law that aren't defined (i.e., no case law or statute covering the exact subject matter).