Jury Nullification in Georgia

#176
#176
golfballs said:
If you feel so strongly in your disapproval of the law that you’re willing to fight and die for it like they did in the American revolution, then perhaps it is of such transcendent importance. I obviously believe there are cases in which such disobedience of the law is warranted, but it’s extremely rare. In lieu of that I’m supportive of democratic ways in which laws can be changed - which just so happens to be the system that those revolutionaries laid out for us.
Click to expand...
They also laid out jury nullification as a way to check unjust laws. More than one way to skin a cat.
 
#177
#177
McDad said:
I don't think anyone in this thread is against laws being changed or our ability to do so.
My point is that laws SHOULD be changed but rarely are. It is a slow process to change a law; by design I suspect. When the process of changing is too slow or absent we must be civilly disobedient to enact the change or neuter the law.
Click to expand...
And by “we” you mean a handful of random people on a jury? I believe “we” are actually more represented in the laws in which our representatives pass even if I personally disagree w some.
 
#179
#179
GAVol said:
Why would a system be devised to allow jury nullification as a check and balance? The purpose of the judiciary was clearly to interpret law; not ignore it when it's inconvenient.
Click to expand...

The judiciary and a jury are two separate things.
 
#183
#183
GAVol said:
Why would a system be devised to allow jury nullification as a check and balance? The purpose of the judiciary was clearly to interpret law; not ignore it when it's inconvenient.
Click to expand...
Probably because they just fought a war over an oppressive government and wanted as many checks on govt tyranny as possible.
 
#187
#187
It's not that I think all nullification is necessarily bad. I just think widespread use would be bad.
 
#188
#188
I see the point about a slippery slope, however the argument about letting a dumb, uncaring jury make that type of call is silly. They are already making the call either way. I support their decision here. I may not support it for a different scenario. I think they should be able to do it if they feel it is the correct decision.

Muh laws, etc.
 
#189
#189
n_huffhines said:
Bad laws undermine the system. Checks snd balances, like jury nullification, validate the system.
Click to expand...

Jury nullification doesn't really fit within the system. It is a rare event that happens outside the system. It is an outlier that simply adds uncertainty to the system.
 
#191
#191
82_VOL_83 said:
Aren't you technically on the gubments payroll while you are in jury duty?
Click to expand...
If you mean the government gives you enough money to pay for parking in the government’s parking garage, then yes. Many employers have a policy where you forfeit your jury duty pay in exchange for being paid for those days. So maybe the companies work for the government?
 
#193
#193
DancingOutlaw said:
If you mean the government gives you enough money to pay for parking in the government’s parking garage, then yes. Many employers have a policy where you forfeit your jury duty pay in exchange for being paid for those days. So maybe the companies work for the government?
Click to expand...
I think employers may be required to pay you for those days since you have no choice in the matter. I know my first job made me either report the income and take a pay cut or they knew what county you lived in and deducted that amount from your check. It was like $15 per day or something silly.
 
#194
#194
GAVol said:
It's not that I think all nullification is necessarily bad. I just think widespread use would be bad.
Click to expand...
Well too much of anything is bad. We obviously need balance. But we are far, far away from being anywhere close to jury nullification being any sort of problem. If anything, the pendulum is swung too far in favor of the law and lawmakers and needs a severe correction towards the middle. That is where jury nullification comes into play. We have far too many laws in this country.
 
#196
#196
82_VOL_83 said:
I think employers may be required to pay you for those days since you have no choice in the matter. I know my first job made me either report the income and take a pay cut or they knew what county you lived in and deducted that amount from your check. It was like $15 per day or something silly.
Click to expand...
Whether a company pays you for jury duty can differ by state. There is no federal law that says they have to. We got $9 a day and it was $6 to park. And you couldn’t bring your lunch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82_VOL_83
#197
#197
Rasputin_Vol said:
Are you in favor of protecting laws or serving justice?
Click to expand...

You're asking the wrong question. It's not about protecting the 'laws' it's about protecting the system in which laws are applied.

One doesn't have to like or agree with a law to understand why they are necessary for a civilized society. They are essential and part of the fabric of the Republic.
 
#198
#198
Septic said:
You're asking the wrong question. It's not about protecting the 'laws' it's about protecting the system in which laws are applied.

One doesn't have to like or agree with a law to understand why they are necessary for a civilized society. They are essential and part of the fabric of the Republic.
Click to expand...
20,000 laws are essential to the fabric of our Republic?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top