Key facts about Jury Trials:
-
Jurors cannot be punished for their decison either “guilty” or “not guilty”, no matter if the decision was the “right” or “wrong” decison.
-
A verdict of “not guilty” cannot be appealed nor overturned.
-
A person cannot be tried for the same criminal act more than once. Famously known as the “No Double Jeopardy” clause. (although: according to the law, mistrials / hung juries don’t count as a trial for the purposes of “No Double Jeopardy”)
Interpret these facts however you will. wink wink, nudge nudge
Also, don’t tell anyone you know that, or you’re not gonna be on any jury.
Can we crowd source ads around Manhattan and have people with bullhorns on the sidewalks around the court entrances announcing “Jury Nullification is your right!”?
Just to be clear, Jury Nullification isn’t a right, more of a natural consequence of the 2 rules:
Jury can’t be punished for not ruling a certain way
And
No double jeopardy.
You can’t outlaw jury nullification without breaking the first rule and you can’t break the first rule because it’s absolutely necessary for a fair justice system
It’s not just a consequence, it’s the entire reason we have juries in the first place. Do you honestly think 12 random untrained people can judge if someone violated a law better than a traines judge holding a bench trial? Juries are always going to be inferior at applying the letter of the law than any trained judge.
The only value of a jury is that it protects against unjust laws. The original idea was that, regardless of what laws the wealthy write, you still need to be able to convince 12 ordinary people that a crime worthy of punishment has taken place.
Jury nullification isn’t just some quirky consequence of the jury system; it’s the entire reason we have juries in the first place. We’ve just collectively forgotten that fact.
A judge can overrule a jury if they think the jury judged the law rather than the defendant, however.
Jury nullification is one way to overturn unfair laws.
If a bunch of juries refuse to play ball, prosecutors will stop trying the cases. They think convictions are the only way to win reelection.
I’m an advocate for homeless people. I 100% support jury nullification.
something like the casey anthony trial comes to mind though. the jury wanted to convict but needed to act objectively on evidence alone. so they all cringed and cried as they all signed off to acquit or whatever. this would be the opposite, but the idea is the same.
Different.
A “guilty” verdict that a judge deems to be lacking evidence and result in the judge giving their verdict that overrides the jury’s. It could also get appealed. So there’s no point of the “guilty” version of Jury Nullification.
In contrast, a “not guilty” verdict cannot be overrulled by the judge, nor can it be appealed. So this version of Jury Nullification is much stronger.
Adams was quoted by the Post as saying the police were withholding the suspect’s name for now to deny him any advantage.
“We don’t want to release that now,” the mayor said. “If you do, you are basically giving a tip to the person we are seeking and we do not want to give him an upper hand at all. Let him continue to believe he can hide behind the mask."
Yeah yeah. I’ll believe it when you prove it Adams. Sounds like you still have Jack shit to me.
That part cracks me up. As if the killer has no idea the police are after him.
It’s worse.
It implies the killer has no idea who he is, so the police informing the name is different from just telling him they know his name.
If they had a name, they’d probably already have the person it belongs to in custody.
Adams is a piece of shit Republican who has dropped any premise of ever being progressive. I look forward to the day he leaves his post.
Also, the guy is already a hero. The moment the public learns the guy’s name, it’s gonna become memorialized.
Sounds like a desperate tactic to get perpetrator to make mistakes (ie, tickets bought hastily to leave country). Sudden plans to leave the country or travel domestically are often flagged by the feds for follow up. The practice was supposedly put on hold [1] but wouldn’t surprise me if it’s used in situations like this.
In my opinion, police wouldn’t bother releasing this statement. If it was real, investigation would continue and the next statement/story would be “we have the person in custody”.
I call bullshit.
That’s one theory, but also, remember that Eric Adams is kind of a moron.
One of the few explanations that makes sense to me is that the cops have identified him but aren’t saying anything so as not to tip him off, and Adams decided to make the announcement anyway, because him being the one to break the news is good for his career. And then figured with impeccable moron logic that as long as he doesn’t use the guy’s name, the guy will be none the wiser.
Lol
Merrick Garland
Same one in charge with investigating trump
Same fucking bullshit
Cops haven’t found shit. I saw a video of a guy putting mask on their face that when on actually make you look like that person. Apparently can buy them on Amazon. How do we know that isn’t a mask? This guy was smart. He didn’t leave behind nothing he didn’t want the cops to find. Hell the so called bottle they found. If you wacth the video or him disposing of it. He placed it in just a way that was for sure to be found.
Also two theories on the backpack. Either he left it on purpose, or my thinking is the cops planted it to make it look like they are solving this thing.
I think who ever this was is a professional or he planned it right and they will not catch this person. Unfortunately they will pin this on someone, and that someone will be dead.
Even if and its a big if they catch this person, no way will they allow this man to be put on trial. Allow his defense lawyer play up that he killed that fucking CEO because someone he loved died because the fucks at United Healthcare denying their claim. And if they had gotten care would have lived.
The backpack had monopoly money in it.
He left it.
He’s fucking leagues beyond getting caught.
Homie rolled up on an ebike with a gun loaded with bullets engraved with messages. Iced this fuckface, tossed a backpack full of monopoly money to throw off the trail and make a statement, and dipped.
Allow his defense lawyer play up that he killed that fucking CEO because someone he loved died
That would not be admissible at trial.
The purpose of a trial is to present or rebut evidence that he killed the CEO. Anything extraneous to that is not allowed.
The exception would be if he were trying an insanity defense, which almost never succeeds.
Please it will be brought up. It goes to motivate. Again rhey will not let this hero go to trial. Besides they won’t get a jury to convict him.
Spoilers for Death Note (the Anime):
spoiler
In Death Note, L had the police announce that they sent thousands of FBI agents into Japan to find Kira, and show it on TV when they knew Yagami Light was watching. There were no such thing as thousands of FBI agents, it was a bluff, and Yagami Light also predicted it and remained calm. This could be a similar bluff.
(Note: This is not to compare Yagami Light to the NYC John Wick, Yamami Light has (arguably) way more unethical acts than our NYC John Wick.)
You mean habitual liar Eric Adams? As quoted by the abominable tabloid the New York Compost?
Yeah, I’m gonna hold out for confirmation from someone not perpetually full of shit…
how would releasing his name vs “we know who it is” give any amount of edge to the guy? do they really think this guy is dumb enough to be complacent? im sure he’s doing 100% of his best effort to remain as lucky as possible and have the best chances of making it onto a container ship headed for cambodia or whatever.
Maybe he has an Internet or social media presence with persuasive and/or humanizing postings, and they want to deny him the PR bump he’d get from them becoming public.
