3 ms·

The fact that she was both wrong and stupid is beside the point. The real issue is the absurdity of the punishment, which is both cruel and unusual in that it's

by alexqgb 16y ago

The fact that she was both wrong and stupid is beside the point. The real issue is the absurdity of the punishment, which is both cruel and unusual in that it's wildly disproportionate, and totally unparalleled by any other form of statutory damage. Cases like this are exactly why the Framers insisted on jury trials in the first place. Through the principle of Jury Nullification, jurors retain power over the law through sanctioned refusal to convict - even when the law has clearly been violated. This check exists as the last line of defense against lawmakers who are abusive, corrupt, and/or inept. For example, the ones who authorized these monstrous fines. In 1972, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the jury has an " unreviewable and irreversible power... to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge.... (US vs Dougherty, 473 F 2d 1113, 1139 (1972)). However, this ruling went on to note "The fact that there is widespread existence of the jury's prerogative, and approval of its existence as a necessary counter to case-hardened judges and arbitrary prosecutors, does not establish as an imperative that the jury must be informed by the judge of that power". In other words, the judge is free to 'command' that the jury rule only on the law, not on its justice. And the jury is free to ignore him - but only if they're aware of the option. I don't know if the 1972 ruling has been superseded. Assuming it hasn't, it appears that none of the judges (or the defense lawyers) made the rules clear. So now we get a legal fiasco, ridiculous public expense, and at least one ruined life.

tzs 16y ago
A jury also has the power to convict in disregard of the law given by the trial judge as many a black defendant in the south from around the end of the civil war through the mid 20th century found out. The judge or a higher court can reverse a jury guilty verdict, so some such wrongly convicted defendants are spared, but most won't be so lucky. In most cases, there will be enough evidence offered to support conviction if the jury believes that evidence over the defendant's explanations, and so there is no way for the court to tell if the jury convicted because they felt the defendant was guilty, or if they convicted because they don't like the defendant's race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. The Framers understood this, which is why they didn't require juries to be told of the nullification power. No one has ever managed to come up with a way to tell juries of nullification without taking a great risk that juries will figure out that they can also go the other way and convict when the law doesn't support it. Not telling the jury about the nullification power is essentially the check on the nullification power.

by alexqgb 16y ago

tzs 16y ago

A jury also has the power to convict in disregard of the law given by the trial judge as many a black defendant in the south from around the end of the civil war through the mid 20th century found out. The judge or a higher court can reverse a jury guilty verdict, so some such wrongly convicted defendants are spared, but most won't be so lucky. In most cases, there will be enough evidence offered to support conviction if the jury believes that evidence over the defendant's explanations, and so there is no way for the court to tell if the jury convicted because they felt the defendant was guilty, or if they convicted because they don't like the defendant's race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. The Framers understood this, which is why they didn't require juries to be told of the nullification power. No one has ever managed to come up with a way to tell juries of nullification without taking a great risk that juries will figure out that they can also go the other way and convict when the law doesn't support it. Not telling the jury about the nullification power is essentially the check on the nullification power.