Jury Nullification

The reason we are in the situation we are now with the courts can be found in the Supreme Court case Bounds v. Smith 430 U.S. 817 (1977), which is part of the reason Public Defenders exist:

"Even the most dedicated trial judges are bound to overlook meritorious cases without the benefit of an adversary presentation. Cf. Gardner v. California, 393 U. S. 367, 393 U. S. 369-370 (1969)."

I have won a Religious Marijuana case, a Religious Molecular Substance case (after a full blown Narcotics Investigation), 2 cases about Driving on the wrong side of the road, and I am suing the DEA now to overturn the Controlled Substances Act. I have also helped with Credit Card Fraud Cases, an Involuntary Manslaughter Case and an Organized Retail theft case. And what I have seen, while going through the court and watching other people's cases while I wait for the judge to call me up, and while talking to people about their own cases, is that about 99% of cases have the Trial Waived meaning people give up their rights. Then within the remaining 1%, about 75%+ of those cases are determined based on the history of your Lawyer or how good they are at saying things like "I have to pick my wife up at the Hospital, can we please get this done quickly" and the final remaining 25% may present case law, but are usually determined by technicalities, for example, if any witnesses show up.

So maybe .5% of cases in America even have a single piece of Case Law presented. And as stated in Bounds V Smith, again:

"Even the most dedicated trial judges are bound to overlook meritorious cases without the benefit of an adversary presentation. Cf. Gardner v. California, 393 U. S. 367, 393 U. S. 369-370 (1969)."
 
SashaShiva said:
Examples of Congressional ULTRA VIRES in US Law:
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but ultra vires, in the legal sense, is Latin for, well, going beyond one's powers. Such as (but not, as far as I know, limited to) exceeding one's Constitutional authority. Therefore, we cannot reasonably expect such a case to become a precedent for future cases of the same nature.

EDIT: BtW, what kind of person brags about driving on the wrong side of the road - TWICE - and getting away with it, FFS? Only time I ever saw that happen, I hadn't even gotten the phone to my ear to make sure there was a dial tone before I heard the crash. And, yeah, I suppose someone, somewhere might have felt sorry for that old bird, seeing as how she's spending the rest of her days in a wheelchair because of it. Me, I don't have an atom of pity for her... All mine went to the poor kid in the back seat who became both an only child and an orphan at the same time when the woman killed both his parents in the front seat and his sister, who was in the back seat with him. Stuff like that, IMHO, is like driving drunk - they shouldn't prosecute the miscreant, they should just shoot them in the head before they manage to kill someone.
 
TorturedSoul said:
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but ultra vires, in the legal sense, is Latin for, well, going beyond one's powers. Such as (but not, as far as I know, limited to) exceeding one's Constitutional authority. Therefore, we cannot reasonably expect such a case to become a precedent for future cases of the same nature.

EDIT: BtW, what kind of person brags about driving on the wrong side of the road - TWICE - and getting away with it, FFS? Only time I ever saw that happen, I hadn't even gotten the phone to my ear to make sure there was a dial tone before I heard the crash. And, yeah, I suppose someone, somewhere might have felt sorry for that old bird, seeing as how she's spending the rest of her days in a wheelchair because of it. Me, I don't have an atom of pity for her... All mine went to the poor kid in the back seat who became both an only child and an orphan at the same time when the woman killed both his parents in the front seat and his sister, who was in the back seat with him. Stuff like that, IMHO, is like driving drunk - they shouldn't prosecute the miscreant, they should just shoot them in the head before they manage to kill someone.
Click to expand...

Beyond the Authority of Congress. Congressional Ultra Vires. Congress is not unlimited in Power, I even have a case that specifically says that phrase "Congress does not have unlimited power".

I am not sure if you compeltely misunderstood me or if you are trolling, I didn't "get away with it", I never broke the Law, it's not always illegal to drive on the wrong side of the road and I was doing it properly. Go read the Texas Traffic Code and stop acting like I'm a Criminal. The Cop was wrong, that's why I "got away with it".
 
SUBCHAPTER B. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY AND PASSING

Sec. 545.051. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY. (a) An operator on a roadway of sufficient width shall drive on the right half of the roadway, unless:

(1) the operator is passing another vehicle;

(2) an obstruction necessitates moving the vehicle left of the center of the roadway and the operator yields the right-of-way to a vehicle that:

(A) is moving in the proper direction on the unobstructed portion of the roadway; and

(B) is an immediate hazard;

(3) the operator is on a roadway divided into three marked lanes for traffic; or

(4) the operator is on a roadway restricted to one-way traffic.

(b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:

(1) passing another vehicle; or

(2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

(c) An operator on a roadway having four or more lanes for moving vehicles and providing for two-way movement of vehicles may not drive left of the center line of the roadway except:

(1) as authorized by an official traffic-control device designating a specified lane to the left side of the center of the roadway for use by a vehicle not otherwise permitted to use the lane;

(2) under the conditions described by Subsection (a)(2); or

(3) in crossing the center line to make a left turn into or out of an alley, private road, or driveway.
 
SashaShiva said:
I am not sure if you compeltely misunderstood me or if you are trolling, I didn't "get away with it", I never broke the Law, it's not always illegal to drive on the wrong side of the road and I was doing it properly.
Click to expand...

Ah, well, I had only your words to go by, and you did use the words "driving on the wrong side of the road."

Other than that, I sometimes have trouble when trying to communicate with bipolars. (And they sometimes have difficulties when trying to communicate with me.)
 
TorturedSoul said:
Ah, well, I had only your words to go by, and you did use the words "driving on the wrong side of the road."

Other than that, I sometimes have trouble when trying to communicate with bipolars. (And they sometimes have difficulties when trying to communicate with me.)
Click to expand...

Lol, Bipolars? You just said that I was going to kill people and was no better than a Drunk Driver, and now you are pretending that you got that from me. You are a Troll.
 
The source in the OP did not load, but I wondered if it was the Fully Informed Jury Association in Montana. They do great work, although they are not well known.

My understanding is that jury nullification was once quite common in the US. It is considered by some a fourth branch of government.

I was once called for jury activity. I went with the full intention of invoking jury nullification in applicable drug cases. It turned out for naught tho because all the cases had been adjudicated by the time potential jurors assembled.

btw, there is no such thing as "jury duty." It is not your "duty."
 
Back
Top Bottom