Jury nullification - Jurors Need to Know That They Can Say No
From what I understand, jury nullification is a constitutional doctrine that allows juries to acquit defendants who are technically guilty but who don't deserve punishment.
There was a recent interesting article by Paul Butler (he is a former federal prosecutor and is currently a professor of law at George Washington University) in The New York Times about jury nullification and he starts by stating, "IF you are ever on a jury in a marijuana case, I recommend that you vote “not guilty” — even if you think the defendant actually smoked pot, or sold it to another consenting adult. As a juror, you have this power under the Bill of Rights; if you exercise it, you become part of a proud tradition of American jurors who helped make our laws fairer." http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/21/op...an-say-no.html
He goes on to point out that nullification was credited with ending our country's alcohol Prohibition as more and more jurors refused to send their neighbors to jail for a law they didn't believe in. He says we need to do the same with today's marijuana arrests. I could not agree with him more. I find it ludicrous people are thrown behind bars for marijuana offenses. Legalize it and tax it!
Anyway, I wasn't even aware of nullification. How about anyone else? Yourself, are you still out there? What are your thoughts? How does this really all play out in a real criminal trial?