100
Newsom's on a roll - vetoes bill to pay jurors a proper wage
(www.sfchronicle.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
100 points (100.0% liked)
news
23575 readers
972 users here now
Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.
Rules:
-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --
-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --
-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --
-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --
-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--
-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--
-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --
-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Honest to god, it's in the court system's best interest to literally grovel at the feet of potential jury members and treat them like royalty. The fact that they don't even get so much as a non-insulting amount of monetary compensation for their time is really just cruelty for the sake of it.
Juries do not need to convict regardless of whether the evidence proves the defendant comitted the crime. It is fully their right to vote however they want for whatever reason they want. That is the right to jury nullification. The justice system prevents that from happening by thoroughly screening jurors. Under the threat of perjury, the courts check each prospective juror for not just intention of jury nullification, but even mere knowledge of its existence as a right.
The only thing preventing the knowledge and justification for jury nullification from spreading to most every potential juror like wildfire is the recognition of legitimacy and respect for the US government, its institutions, and its reactionary laws. If jurors view the court as evil and illegitimate, then they're sure as hell not going to sit back and send people to prison on the basis of laws widely despised by the majority of American citizens.
Policies like the criminalization of drug possession and charging anyone who has ever had so much as a miscarriage with murder are already massively unpopular. They could easily become de facto unenforceable because it takes only one juror to hang the verdict. Just 1/12th of all potential jurors would need to be willing to use jury nullification and accept a small risk of perjury charges in order to save an innocent person from life ruining charges.
Yeah I'm spit balling with my post but it's legitimately a thing we should be pointing out more. The jury is a bit of a weak link in the chain of oppression we have here, I don't know if there's been a movement calling it out before
Why? Court best interest is to get plea deals, and long wait times and accompanying lawyer's fee is the shit to fuck poor people
Because if potential jurors were to stop seeing the court as legitimate in sufficient numbers, they'd be much more willing to use jury nullification against obviously horrific laws. Defendants in such cases would never receive guilty verdicts and therefore lawyers would advise to never take a plea deal in such an easy to sympathize with case.
Just hooting from the balconies here but, in agreement with cosecantohi, it's the random selection bias not being neutered yet lies a strength within the jury