Jury Nullification! Illinois Woman who recorded cops acquitted of felony eavesdropping

Sorry if this is posted already.
Who says the system doesn't work? I know it usually don't seem to but, this is cause for celebration. A jury supercedes any Supreme Court decision. Its why I tell people don't plea. A jury of your peers will likely give you more hope than court official in pursuit of a political recognition.
www.suntimes.com...

Things like this happen if you have what they call "solid evidence" which she did

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


I am glad you mentioned Jury Nullification.

Juries make CASE LAW:

Case law is the body of available writings explaining the verdicts in a case. Case law is most often created by judges in their rulings, when they write their decisions and give the reasoning behind them, as well as citing precedents in other cases and statutes that had a bearing on their decision. A single case may generate virtually no written interpretations or opinions, or, as is the case with many that come before the Supreme Court, it may generate a number of opinions as it works its way through various lower-circuit courts. These collected opinions can be referred to in the future by other judges when they make their rulings on similar cases, allowing the law to remain relatively consistent. www.wisegeek.com...

I was going to start a thread on Jury Nullification because it is an area that the elite are trying to change so as to take away even more of our rights.

Judges in most states do not have to inform juries of their rights to judge both the case AND the LAW> Also There is a move to have Judges or even worse bureaucrats take the place of the jury trying cases and delivering judgments WITHOUT a jury.

We have a constitution RIGHT to a jury in any criminal case and in any civil case over $20 dollars.

However most citizens are completely unaware of any of this.

Amen, Brother! Its a trumped up charge to begin with. Her arrest was a steaming shovelful of of govt tyranny.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


Yes, It was.

That is why it is absolutely critical that we protect and start using our right to a jury trial and that we push for state laws making it law that judges MUST inform Juries of all there rights AND that juries can nullify laws.

....According to the Yale Law Journal in 1964, during the first third of the 19th century judges did inform juries of the right, forcing lawyers to argue "the law -- its interpretation and validity -- to the jury." By the latter part of the century, however, judges and state law were increasingly moving against nullification.[headline In 1895 the US Supreme Court upheld the principle but ruled that juries were not to be informed of it by defense attorneys, nor were judges required to tell them about it. Stephen Barkan, writing in Social Problems (October 1983), noted that the attacks on nullification stemmed in part from juries acquitting strike organizers and other labor activists....

Today, the constitutions of only two states -- Maryland and Indiana -- clearly declare the nullification right, although two others -- Georgia and Oregon -- refer to it obliquely. The informed jury movement would like all states to require that judges instruct juries on their power to serve, in effect, as the final legislature of the land concerning the law in a particular case.

As the diverse nature of the movement suggests, many groups in this country feel the government has overstepped its power in some way and that there must be protection for the natural rights of American citizens. They are defending not only the right to protest or carry a gun or not wear seatbelts but challenging the right of the government to decide such matters without the mediating effect of a jury's judgement of fairness in a particular case.... prorev.com...

reply to post by crimvelvet

You will probably like this site. Fully Informed Jurors Association. Everything there is to know about juror rights and powers.
fija.org...

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by Hillbilly123069

 

I am glad you mentioned Jury Nullification.

Juries make CASE LAW:

Case law is the body of available writings explaining the verdicts in a case. Case law is most often created by judges in their rulings, when they write their decisions and give the reasoning behind them, as well as citing precedents in other cases and statutes that had a bearing on their decision. A single case may generate virtually no written interpretations or opinions, or, as is the case with many that come before the Supreme Court, it may generate a number of opinions as it works its way through various lower-circuit courts. These collected opinions can be referred to in the future by other judges when they make their rulings on similar cases, allowing the law to remain relatively consistent. www.wisegeek.com...

I was going to start a thread on Jury Nullification because it is an area that the elite are trying to change so as to take away even more of our rights.

Judges in most states do not have to inform juries of their rights to judge both the case AND the LAW> Also There is a move to have Judges or even worse bureaucrats take the place of the jury trying cases and delivering judgments WITHOUT a jury.

We have a constitution RIGHT to a jury in any criminal case and in any civil case over $20 dollars.

However most citizens are completely unaware of any of this.

TPTB are doing all they can do to do away with judicial review being allowed by juries by using the excuse that the lay person does not have the legal expertise to decide on the constitutionality of laws. If this is allowed to happen then our judicial system as we know it will forever be changed in a negative way.

When We The People are no longer afforded the right to decide on the constitutionality of laws then we are not truly free from oppresionary laws.

It is bad enough that under Clinton we lost our right to have all cases heard by the USSC as he is the one responsible for the mandating of the writ of certiorari. Now under certiorari the USSC chooses which cases it will here with the exception of only a few cases in which it is bound by procedural law to hear. In a nutshell Clintons enactment of Certiorari review stripped us of our right to a guaranteed appeal to the highest court in the land.

At least in this case the defendant was lucky enough to have a jury of competent people that had an understanding of the principles of our constitution.