Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> If the judge or lawyers don't follow the laws set down by the legislature, 
>> they get fired. If the jury doesn't follow the laws, the accused goes free 
>> and the jury isn't in any trouble.
> 
>   Isn't that a case of mistrial? Is the procedure in case of mistrial
> really letting the accused go free, rather than setting up a new trial?

You mean if the jury doesn't follow the laws? Well, there's two.

If you mean "the jury talks to someone they shouldn't" or "the jury is 
bribed to vote one way or the other", yes, that's a mistrial.

What I was talking about is if the jury refuses to enforce certain laws that 
are valid laws, because the jury disagrees.  Like, in the days when the USA 
still had slavery, the law was that a slave who escaped and went to an area 
where there wasn't slavery still had to be sent back if he got caught. Many 
juries refused to enforce this law, since they saw slavery as immoral even 
if legal.

I could also see if (say) abortion were made unconditionally illegal and the 
punishment was 20 years in jail for the mother, I could easily see juries 
simply saying "Nope, the mother is innocent" even if every piece of evidence 
including videotapes and confessions by the doctors was presented, yes?

For that, you can't punish the jury. I meant by "the jury not following the 
laws", I meant the laws that say "you should convict someone if the evidence 
is overwhelming."

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no
   CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message