Running head: JURY NULLIFICATION

Jury Nullification Deana Geno CJS344 June 6th, 2012 J. Mariconda

JURY NULLIFICATION

Jury Nullification

Introduction Jury nullification is when a jury exonerates a defendant in a court case, even with evidence proving they are guilty of the accused crime. If this takes place, the jury has found the defendant innocent by nullification when normally they would have been guilty. As a rule this jury nullification is voted on by a jury that is in disagreement with the laws sounding the case. By using this outcome the jury is demonstrating their disagreement with the law, in their decision not to punish the individual who committed the crime. Jury nullification is a tool that society can use to show their viewpoint on a law(s) effect, and over time the effects of this act will have detrimental consequence on the ways laws are created and enforced.

Negative Arguments: Race-Based Jury Nullification: Arguments against race-based jury nullification leads to unmerited acquittals, hung juries, and a rejection to believe the evidence that will eventually undermine our criminal justice process. As long as jury nullification is permitted, courts cannot efficiently contain nullification to the negative response to unwanted laws or the discharge of truly innocent defendants, in which it is best used. Regrettably, jury nullification has enabled a example of disorder for which juries set free defendants who are undoubtedly accountable of violent behavior against an disliked some victim, example: an African American or Hispanic ethnic background.

Soon after the Civil War, the federal government approved The Klan Act to fight against race-based jury nullification (King, 2006). This Klan Act banned Ku Klux Klan members and

JURY NULLIFICATION

sympathizers beginning placed and serving on juries however this act did not appear to impact or stop this model of in justice, White juries still were finding White defendants not guilty for committing crimes against African Americans and other non-Whites.

Positive Arguments: Race-Based Jury Nullification: A good number of juries are likely to release a defendant if members of that jury are understanding towards the defendant or un-approving of the law by which the charge for the crime has been broken. There are still court cases that continue, in which some juror's may not desire to convict for racial reasons. A number of officials differ on following an absolute report of an all White jury finding defendants not guilty that committed crimes against African Americans and in a society in which is more likely for an African Americans to have a higher probability of arrest, conviction followed by imprisonment or jail time. Thus, jury nullification is used as an influencing tool in order to show a prejudiced course of action form our court systems as to how a law is perceive and written. An attorney and previous Democratic National Committee Chairperson Paul Butler stated, "The race of a black defendant is sometimes a legally and morally appropriate factor for jury nullification" (Yale Law Journal, 1995). Subsequent to all, juries daringly use this ability to block prosecution of individual(s) who resisted the Fugitive Slave Act (King, 2006). Butler additional expressed, African American communities would profit from certain non-violent offenders remaining in their communities rather than serving prison sentences (Butler, 1995).

JURY NULLIFICATION

Examples: Raced -Based Jury Nullifications: Jury nullification being used in court cases to voice an opinion that has been used for a rather long time. The structure of race-based jury nullification is when a race of the defendant is the solitary reason as to whether or not he or she is guilty by the jury. Some members of the legal system have supported Race-based jury nullification. A George Washington University professor; Paul Butler, is a avid enthusiast for jury nullification. He states: "black juries should acquit black defendants for nonviolent offenses even when the evidence of guilt is clear" (Cato, 1999). All through history a number of examples in which cases where the use of race-based jury nullification had been used by a jury to show disapproval of laws or prosecution. One of the most known and wide publicize case of planned jury nullification was the O. J. Simpson trial. (Linder, 2011). Throughout the trial of Simpson he was accused of the murder of, Nicole Brown Simpson his ex-wife. Simpsons jury members were predominately Black, by the conclusion of his trial; they acquitted him of the murder of his ex-wife. In this case the jury being mostly black seem to be the reason for a not guilty verdict, thus using race based jury nullification. There are further examples all the way through history to present of race-based jury nullification.

Choose a Position: It can be a complex situation to be for or against race-based jury nullification. However I do not feel that in any case it should be allowed or is it a good idea. Some critics consider jury nullification as a mockery of the law and law makers. These critics also believe that if all the jury had to do was apply the rule of law based on the facts, then criminal justice could be done through computers with input and outputs to fulfill the function of a fair and impartial jury

JURY NULLIFICATION

(Lal, 2010). I agree that race-based jury nullification should be used if a case is merrily unjust and the evidence is wrong or tainted and it seems the defendant is being hung out by the prosecution. Evidence must prove a case and that an individual is guilty of the crime accused; The Constitution plainly states every American has the right to a fair trial, to be judged by a jury of their peers. If a defendant were convicted by race; then equally they should be acquitted for that reason so where does the evidence of a crime come in to play if it is look at in this manner? Prerna Lal stated in this, The Case for Race-based Jury Nullification, Do we want a criminal justice system based on punishing every violation of the law, even when the law does not make much sense? Or do we want a system that is flexible and affords a jury of peers some right to change the outcome of a trial based on what seems fair to their community?(2010) I feel this is a good response to express thoughts on Race-Based Jury Nullification.

Conclusion Viewpoints will vary on jury nullification and its fairness. It is a hard assessment and in some cases our criminal justice system is made to be blinded to race, background, economics or gender. In my belief jury nullification should only be allowed if the court system fails and an individuals life in as stake. This is an instance where I would like to see a jury use every ounce of evidence not race, gender, or social status to find guilty or not guilty but by evidence alone.

JURY NULLIFICATION

References

Bryjack, G. (2009). Jury Nullification. Adirondack Daily Enterprise. Retrieved from: http://www.adirondackdailyenterprise.com

Butler, P. (1995). Racially-based Jury Nullification: Black Power in the Criminal Justice System. Yale Law Journal. Retrieved from: http://www.questia.com/

King, N. (2006). Jury Nullification Is Unfair. Racial Profiling. Retrieved from: Apollo Library, Opposing Viewpoints Database.

Lal, P. (2010, September 9). The case for race-based jury nullification. Retrieved from: http://humanrights.change.org/blog/view/the_case_for_race-based_jury_nullification

Linder, D. O. (2011). Famous Court Cases. Retrieved from: http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/simpson.htm