McIntire, a 19-year-old student at Boston’s University of Massachusetts, appeared in federal court Friday and has been charged with one count of unlawful possession of an unregistered destructive device and one count of malicious damage by fire of any property used in interstate commerce.
No you would not. You would find that she is not guilty.
What you’re describing has a name, and that name is nullification.
No it’s not. Discussing nullification would get be booted off a jury. However, if considering all the facts, I were to vote not guilty, it would not.
Think whatever you like but jury nullification is when a juror votes “not guilty” when they actually think someone is guilty of a law that they disagree with.
Okay. Apparently you think I’m fighting you for no reason. Is it nullification? Yes. Don’t call it that. Don’t talk about that. Because it will get you booted off a jury.
Haha, I mean, we’re definitely arguing over semantics but you’re saying something equivalent to, “No, don’t eat ice cream. Put some in your mouth and then swallow it, but don’t eat. We never eat.”
Except the point is that if you say you would eat ice cream, you don’t get the ice cream. Legally speaking as a juror you are supposed to uphold the law. If the judge or prosecutor has any inkling you might nullify, they’ll boot your ass out of the pool in a hurry.
Only if nullification was not a possibility. Nullification sends a much stronger and important message. Namely we don’t give a fuck if they’re guilty or not. Because this is a bullshit show trial that does not have Justice in mind. Yes I’m aware prosecutors often ask for the largest applicable sentence possible eventually negotiating down. That doesn’t make this any less bullshit.