Jury nullification is the term for when a jury declines to convict a defendant despite overwhelming evidence of guilt. This can be a form of civil disobedience, a political statement against a specific law, or a show of empathy and support to the defendant.

“It’s not a legal defense sanctioned under the law,” said Cheryl Bader, associate professor of law at Fordham School of Law. “It’s a reaction by the jury to a legal result that they feel would be so unjust or morally wrong that they refuse to impose it, despite what the law says.”

  • dhork@lemmy.worldEnglish
    6·
    17 hours ago

    … the things you quoted don’t back up your statement. You quoted:

    If they can’t all agree, this is called a hung jury, and the Judge will have to declare a mistrial. A mistrial does not mean that the case is over. After a mistrial, the prosecutor can choose to try the case again.

    If they don’t all agree, it’s a mistrial in NYS, and although he doesn’t get convicted right then and there, the State can try the case again. He is still in jeopardy, unless he runs for President, I suppose. That would be a interesting turn. (nvm, he is only 26, and can’t run for President yet)

    The only way for him to be out of legal jeopardy is for all the jurors to agree to let him off. They can do that by agreeing that the State didn’t prove it’s case adequately enough. Jury Nullification is when the jury says “Yeah, the State proved he did it, but it doesn’t matter, it is in the best interests of Justice that he shouldn’t be punished”. And I really doubt you will get 12 New Yorkers to say that.

    If that does happen, the State has very little recourse after that. They can’t try him again, and have extremely limited avenues for appeal. (But they can appeal: see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_notwithstanding_verdict). One key thing I get from that is that jurors still need to deliver a rationale for their verdict, even if they nullify. If they say “we find him not guilty because of that chisled jawline”, with no further justification, that may qualify to get overturned.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.mlEnglish
      4·
      14 hours ago

      Luigi should announce his candidacy for the 2036 presidential election. Surely the completely unbiased justice system will give him the same leeway they gave trump.

    • testfactor@lemmy.world
      3·
      16 hours ago

      To your last part, a judge can’t JNOV if the verdict was not guilty.

      From that wiki :

      A judge may not enter a JNOV of “guilty” following a jury acquittal in United States criminal cases. Such an action would violate a defendant’s Fifth Amendment right not to be placed in double jeopardy and Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury.

      So if they jury annul, that’s the end, and there’s really no recourse for the state at that point.

      Agree with everything else you said though.

    • Josey_Wales@lemm.eeEnglish
      21·
      15 hours ago

      If all vote not guilty it’s called an acquittal. If that happens, despite overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is jury nullification ending in an acquittal. If a mistrial happens, meaning the jury cannot reach a verdict, despite overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is jury nullification ending in a mistrial.

      Source: I have been a public defender in NYC for 15 years.

      • dhork@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        15 hours ago

        Oh good, you actually know what you are talking about.

        Quick question: when the jury renders a verdict, is is only “thumbs up/thumbs down”? Or do they need to give any justification? Can they flat out say “The evidence is overwhelming, but we find the defendant Not Guilty because he is oh, so pretty!” and have that stand up? Or do they simply say “Not Guilty” and we never find out why?

        • Josey_Wales@lemm.eeEnglish
          21·
          15 hours ago

          This is New York State specific. When the verdict is announced the jury foreperson announces it in open court after it is shown to the presiding judge. At that point the defense Alan request to poll the individual jurors. Occasionally, there is a discrepancy.

          Jury deliberations are secret prior to the verdict being announced. Once announced jurors are free to say whatever they want but cannot be compelled.