If you want to nullify a law as a member of a jury, don’t talk about jury nullification:
- during jury selection
- during the trial
- in private with any other jury member
- during verdict deliberation
There is no Michael Scott moment where you “declare nullification”.
Even if the defendant is on camera and appears to commit the crime; if the defendant admitted to committing the crime; if the defendant shook your hand and said, “send me to prison, I’m guilty” — you simply decide that you did not see sufficient evidence that the defendant is guilty.
The moment you talk about jury nullification, you will be removed from the jury and/or cause a mistrial.
Just a friendly tip to those who want to serve their civic duty!
it’s so fuckin goofy like it’s not even a specific rule it’s just something you think of when you first learn about the legal system like, wait the jury decides if the defendant is guilty of the crime? they can say whatever they want, so if they do think the defendant is guilty but they don’t think they should be punished, they can just say they think they’re not guilty, right? and then you think, no, surely that’s stupid, how would the legal system even function if that was happening, and then you find out that it only doesn’t work like that because people are thoroughly convinced that the law is a Real Thing beyond and outside of the decisions of the people that claim to uphold it like christian morality kicks us all in the butthole once again.