ULPT - Jury Nullification
Posted by DeepFriedSlapshot@reddit | UnethicalLifeProTips | View on Reddit | 33 comments
Think there's a chance you might be arrested for a crime? Wear a t-shirt that says in big letters 'Jury Nullification - Google it'
One of four things will now happen: 1. The prosecution won't show video of your interview to the jury because they'll see the clear suggestion that they look up jury nullification and prosecutors and courts hate that. 2. They'll show the video anyway and the jury will learn about nullification. 3. They'll show the video but blur your t-shirt and your lawyer can ask the cop on the stand what the t-shirt said. Boom, jury learns about nullification. 4. They show the video but blur your t-shirt and your lawyer can ask the cop if the t-shirt was blurry in person. Once they answer no the jury now know your interview video was doctored, and that's reasonable doubt every day of the week and twice on Sundays.
MyNameIsMrEdd@reddit
Or the judge could tell you to go home and dress properly or lock you up for contempt?
DeepFriedSlapshot@reddit (OP)
The t-shirt was to be worn for the police interview, not in court.
Try learning to read, dipshit.
Socratic_Tantrum9177@reddit
Why are you so upset/angry?
BourbonSucks@reddit
the jury will only nullify for their own moral reasons.
The jury can deem the person innocent without revealing their reasons. its as simple as that. If they dont feel like you are innocent, you wont be found innocent.
Plaid-Ass-007@reddit
The problem is that few people have knowledge of jury nullification. And the courts are hostile to educating the jurors/general public.
Frozenbbowl@reddit
they are hostile because its a loophole not a right. reddit talks about it like some secret right... but its a loophole in the black box jury system
and that is not to say it cannot be used for good, but by far the most common usage it has seen in america is to find white men innocent of crimes they committed against black people.
Plaid-Ass-007@reddit
Serious question: why can’t those in power just close the loophole? And how did jury nullification come to be?
Frozenbbowl@reddit
How do you close it without removing the black box of the jury? The fact is that what goes on in jury Deliberations isn't open to investigation. There really isn't a way that you can close the loophole without undermining the jury system as a whole.
And for the most part, those in power have no reason to undermine the jury system as a whole.... Most of those in power believe in our systems no matter how much the cynics want to tell you otherwise.
Plaid-Ass-007@reddit
How do you close it without removing the black box of the jury? I guess the powers that be could say hey, you can no longer judge whether or not the law being applied is just or correct. That’s my uneducated Guess as to how they could remove jury nullification.
iliark@reddit
Without mind reading, how do you enforce that?
TheBusterHymenOpen@reddit
Just asking, why can't the jurors ask the questions and leave the lawyers out of the testimony part? The prosecution presents their case and calls witnesses to testify. They get to ask some questions to get things started. The jury then gets their turn, each juror gets to ask their questions, and then on to the next. After all jurors have asked their questions go back and have kind of a lightning round for follow ups. Work through the prosecution and defense sides of the case, then off to deliberation.
If the lawyers try to interfere with the process, the Judge could tell them to just sit down and shut up.
Frozenbbowl@reddit
I mean that's already true. But they can't do anything about it because they can't ask what happened in the jury room. They can't ask you why you voted a certain way..
Your proposal highlights exactly why the loophole exists. Because the jury is not supposed to judge whether or law is just. There's just no way to stop them from doing it
Plaid-Ass-007@reddit
Thanks for the discussion
VentusSanctus@reddit
So, Jury Nullification exists because of a specific safeguard. You cannot hold the members of the jury accountable for their decision in a case. It is the jury who is tasked with deciding if the law was truly broken.
If you allow the government to punish jurors for doing jury nullification, you open the door to retribution for "wrong" decisions.
You cant realistically stop JN without endangering the entire jury system.
Plaid-Ass-007@reddit
Why the hostility to those who discuss JN in the courtroom?
Frozenbbowl@reddit
Because it undermines the rule of law. It's something you can do, but it's not the way the system is meant to work. So of course the system isn't going to let you just discuss it as if it was a normal part. Once again because you apparently didn't read it. It's a loophole not a right. Loopholes don't tend to get favorable treatment in any system
thekyledavid@reddit
The point of learning about jury nullification is that some people think they are legally obligated to vote how they truly believe, and haven’t realized there is basically no way for the courts to enforce that
Yeah, you still need to be a sympathetic criminal to actually have a chance at nullification, but you cannot get nullified if the jury thinks they have to vote based on if they think you did it
drseamus@reddit
A jury doesn't find anyone innocent. They find them not guilty. Jury nullification is when they think the defendant is not innocent and still vote not guilty.
BourbonSucks@reddit
yeah, in english technically if you want to speak in negatives. "Not (not innocent)". Reddit doesnt need the legalese
drseamus@reddit
This is not a function of the English language, this is how the justice system works. Innocence is not a part of the process, they only determine guilty or not guilty.
Jury nullification is when the jury votes Not Guilty despite thinking the person is guilty. Therefore they know the person is not innocent although in a legal framework that is irrelevant.
bixler_@reddit
the mere fact that a person is acutely aware of the concept of jury nullification is all that is needed
Kestrel_VI@reddit
Yes, however a jury knowing about nullification can be considered “poisoning the jury” and thus, technically, could lead to either a mistrial or an adjournment.
spammmmmmmmy@reddit
This is amazing work u/DeepFriedSlapshot. Do you have some kind of specialised knowledge or experience in this area?
NoMammoth8422@reddit
Lol this is only unethical bc it has zero chance of working.
Atworkwasalreadytake@reddit
So are you saying that your first stop after committing a crime should be a screen print shop, or are you saying we should just all have these shirts in our dresser?
How do you imagine this plays out?
TheWurstOfMe@reddit
Judges hate this one trick
burglin@reddit
This is it. The dumbest ULPT yet.
Gen_JohnsonJameson@reddit
That's assuming your jury thinks you are technically guilty but getting screwed by the system. Very, very, very few cases fall into that category. Most of the time the prosecutor/D.A. will drop the charges if they think there is even an inkling that the jury might feel that way.
I don't know if you have ever served on a jury, but the people who are on trial are generally guilty as hell. Occasionally, they are guilty as hell and the prosecution bungles the case so badly that you have no choice but to vote to acquit (think OJ Simpson.)
Brilliant defense lawyers who magically find the loophole to prove crooked cops are screwing the defendant (think Perry Mason or Lincoln Lawyer) simply don't exist.
So yeah, it might work, but instead of paying a bunch of money to make a T-Shirt like that, save that money and put it towards a good lawyer.
DocSerrada@reddit
How much do you think that T-Shirt would cost to make?
Gen_JohnsonJameson@reddit
Probably $19.99 plus $400 tariff.
Danibecr84@reddit
Just recently in the Karen Reed trial they showed that the police flipped the video backwards to make it appear as they were standing on the opposite side of the car. I feel that was pretty good "gotcha" moment. But I agree....its a rare occurrence.
Gen_JohnsonJameson@reddit
It's an especially risky bet to hope something like that happens when 20 to 30 years of your life is the wager.
Total-Tonight1245@reddit
3 and 4 aren’t how trials work. The judge would make a pretrial ruling that prohibits your attorney from asking those questions or arguing that the blurry shirt creates reasonable doubt.