To determine whether or not an accused individual is guilty there are two primary options in the USA. A trial before a judge who makes the decision, or a trial by a “jury of your peers” where the whole jury must agree that the individual is guilty. A jury of one’s peers means that the people selected to hear the case are selected from the general populace and have no substantial connection to the accused. For example, you wouldn’t put the person’s mother on the jury. The jurors are not required to be lawyers or experts in any field. Just average people.
If you just wanted some people to take the facts of the case and the facts of the law and determine whether or not the accused was guilty, then you would want experts and lawyers on the jury. That’s how trials used to be hundreds of years ago. A judge, often appointed by a king, would pass sentence over the peons brought before him. Since our legal system has average everyday people as jurors, clearly they are supposed to do more than that.
This is where jury nullification comes in. The jurors not only judge based on the facts of the case, but also on whether or not the law in question is just. If an individual is accused of a crime, and is clearly in violation of the law, the juror can still find them not guilty if the law in question is unjust. In essence, the jurors nullify the law by refusing to convict. For example, during the prohibition era, it was not unheard of for juries to return not guilty verdicts for people accused of selling or transporting alcohol. The jurors thought the laws was were wrong so they refused to convict. A much more tragic example was in the deep south where jurors would sometime refuse to convict people of lynching black people.
We have previously asked moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification when this was suggested in context of murder or other violent crimes. Following a discussion in our team we want to clarify that we are no longer requesting moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification in the context of violent crimes when the crime in question already happened. We will still consider suggestions of jury nullification for crimes that have not (yet) happened as advocation for violence, which is violating our terms of service.
Not true - we’re just not allowed to discuss jury nullification in the context of encouraging someone to commit a violent felony which includes the promise of absolution through jury nullification.
Or something, idk. It was kinda weird.
Jury nullification as two English words that can be spoken one after the other, however, is perfectly allowable.
You plant shit seeds, you get shit weeds. I hate the fact that Reddit has grown since I bailed over for API changes. It hurts my soul knowing I did the right thing and bailed but the vast majority of people who were pissed off at Reddit ended up back on the platform.
“we have no choice but to follow Reddits guidelines”
There’s another choice, but that would require you to look past reddit.
We will tolerate these beatings because we are still in love with the assaulter.
Oof… Yeah I mean… yeah. That’s a pretty apt description of how the world is where it is now.
No, actually because they’re hoping the assaulter will pass the bat once they get tired
Trickle down batonomics
Hidden Donuts, why are you hiding?
I am? Or am I missing a joke here? Wouldn’t be the first time
In Linux, putting a “.” before a file/folder name hides it. ;)
Ah shit my cover is blown, never used Linux
There’s no hiding it. They can tell by your socks.
On Lemmy. Never used Linux. Your story doesn’t add up!
I’ve only used Linux when I used Retropie, does that count?
There’s dozens of us, DOZENS
./Ha_ha
someone did -la
Hidden files on Linux start with a period.
Lemmy has to be one of the very few places on the internet where a Linux based joke isn’t considered obscure.
Didn’t lemmy.World admins also have an issue pinned earlier?
Yeah we’re not allowed to discuss jury nullification.
A legal part of the justice system cannot be discussed?
You can for past crimes, not future crimes.
The whole statement: https://lemmy.world/c/lemmyworld
About the manifesto
https://lemmy.world/comment/13922763
On the other hand, there is [email protected] that got created recently. This thread can interest you, it talks about jury nullification: https://lemmy.world/post/22973877
Not an American and we don’t have jury system here.
What’s jury nullification and any notable cases where it was applied?
To determine whether or not an accused individual is guilty there are two primary options in the USA. A trial before a judge who makes the decision, or a trial by a “jury of your peers” where the whole jury must agree that the individual is guilty. A jury of one’s peers means that the people selected to hear the case are selected from the general populace and have no substantial connection to the accused. For example, you wouldn’t put the person’s mother on the jury. The jurors are not required to be lawyers or experts in any field. Just average people.
If you just wanted some people to take the facts of the case and the facts of the law and determine whether or not the accused was guilty, then you would want experts and lawyers on the jury. That’s how trials used to be hundreds of years ago. A judge, often appointed by a king, would pass sentence over the peons brought before him. Since our legal system has average everyday people as jurors, clearly they are supposed to do more than that.
This is where jury nullification comes in. The jurors not only judge based on the facts of the case, but also on whether or not the law in question is just. If an individual is accused of a crime, and is clearly in violation of the law, the juror can still find them not guilty if the law in question is unjust. In essence, the jurors nullify the law by refusing to convict. For example, during the prohibition era, it was not unheard of for juries to return not guilty verdicts for people accused of selling or transporting alcohol. The jurors thought the laws
waswere wrong so they refused to convict. A much more tragic example was in the deep south where jurors would sometime refuse to convict people of lynching black people.!lemmyworld
Not true - we’re just not allowed to discuss jury nullification in the context of encouraging someone to commit a violent felony which includes the promise of absolution through jury nullification.
Or something, idk. It was kinda weird.
Jury nullification as two English words that can be spoken one after the other, however, is perfectly allowable.
I think this is going to cause de-federation.
Not that the mods are aware, but if Reddit disappeared tomorrow, I (sadly) suspect most users would go to Twitter or various Discords.
deleted by creator
I’ve thought about it as some of my niche interests have dried up on Reddit and apparently only live on Twitter now.
And maybe Discord. It’s hard to tell because it’s closed, but I see hints of discussion spilling out into GH issues or whatever.
I despise both for different reasons, but where else am OlI gonna go if I actually want to talk with the community?
deleted by creator
I still use Twitter. It has a pretty awesome metal community. People I’ve shared music with for many years now.
shithole 1 or shithole 2.
What if we made a new shithole?
then i would leave. Im trying to run away from the shit wave.
They even have to leave, they just have to ignore the admins and become ungovernable.
But they won’t, because they’re cowards.
Anyone with integrity left reddit on July 1st, 2023
You plant shit seeds, you get shit weeds. I hate the fact that Reddit has grown since I bailed over for API changes. It hurts my soul knowing I did the right thing and bailed but the vast majority of people who were pissed off at Reddit ended up back on the platform.
It’s bots dude