I am going to ignore the moving the goal posts, brah. Because you're the one doing it. The original debate started when I tried to explain the present common law system that we have. | Utefans.Net
Utefans.Net - Uniting the Fans Since 1998
Mobile - Home - Message Board - Best Stuff - Game Schedule - Photo Gallery - Quotable - Join!

I am going to ignore the moving the goal posts, brah. Because you're the one doing it. The original debate started when I tried to explain the present common law system that we have.

Posted By: ironman1315
Date: Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 09:38 pm

You can't seem to accept the fact that juries do not make precedent. The reason why jury nullifcation works is for two reasons, 1) juries can't be punished for getting "the wrong result" and 2) you can't retry or appeal a conviction under. No, juries should not be punished for nullification. Nor do I think nullification should take it away. But nullification has no binding precedential effect. A million juries in a row could declare not guilty verdicts for people clearly guilty of possession statutes, but of the million and first jury convicted the guy, that guy would be guilty and go to prison.

Now, of course, juries do not do nullify very often. One reason is that they are not informed of that ability, nor do they have to be informed. Secondly, they don't because they do not see themselves as lawmakers. But they usually don't have much fear of punishment because, again, no one knows about it, and if they did it there would be no punishment and the prosecution couldn't even threaten punishment.

Now, as for your comment on precedent, you are correct, precedent can be wrong. That is why judges change it. That is why we have a SCOTUS to set precedent and overturn precedent. But, outside the nullfication issue, juries are bound by that law. Judges are bound by that law.

So, let's look at your sodomy claim, the SCOTUS overturned that in, if memory serves, Lawrence v. Texas. So, no prosecutor would be able to bring a sodomy charge as it would be 1) malicious prosecution and subject to fines, sanctions, and loss of a license and 2) would be a loser. Now, should they convict? No, because, again, SCOTUS decision. But they wouldn't have that question presented to them because the judge would dismiss the case, quickly. (And, again, even if the jury nullifies the law a million times, if the law is on the books and not deemed unconstitutional by the Court, that would not change the law. Because the million and first person charged could be convicted under the statute period the end.

Juries in this day and age do not create the law. They are and have been for some time a trier of fact. The judge tells the jury what the law is by way of the jury instructions. The jury then applies the law to the facts presented. That is what they are and have been for centuries, outside the limited use of nullification.

Now, what evidence would I accept otherwise, well any jury decision that had any binding precedent on a similar case following it. Or something in the United States Constitution or a state constitution that would indicate the jury has the authority to create binding precedent. Something, anything, which is what I have been consistently asking for since this whole thing started.

<<Ignore ironman1315 ] [PritnerPrint This Message ] >>

Messages In This Thread


o NEW: The other thread is nigh unreadable. Zeous, if you have any evidence to support your claims that juries make laws do it here please.
ironman1315 - -- Thursday 13 June 2019, at 10:07 am [ID# 1948160] [reply]
(3)
o NEW: You would do well to understand the difference between questions of law and fact.
ironman1315 - -- Thursday 13 June 2019, at 10:10 am [ID# 1948161] [reply]
(1)
Zeous icon NEW: It's self-evident in the definition you selected. Who creates custom? Judges? Did judges exist before any and all custom, which precedes precedent? (pardon the redundancy, but apparently it is needed) (short)
Zeous - -- Thursday 13 June 2019, at 02:31 pm [ID# 1948177] [reply]
o NEW: Oh my hell. The customs referred to were judicial customs. Judge customs.
ironman1315 - -- Thursday 13 June 2019, at 07:50 pm [ID# 1948187] [reply]
(2)
Zeous icon NEW: Interesting that this triggers you so much
Zeous - -- Friday 14 June 2019, at 10:23 am [ID# 1948193] [reply]
o NEW: What does that have to do with how US law works now?
ironman1315 - -- Friday 14 June 2019, at 11:15 am [ID# 1948196] [reply]
(2)
Zeous icon NEW: Seems to me you are moving the goal posts, brah. Suddenly 1000+ years of precedent doesn't count? (long)
Zeous - -- Saturday 15 June 2019, at 02:24 pm [ID# 1948218] [reply]
o NEW: I am going to ignore the moving the goal posts, brah. Because you're the one doing it. The original debate started when I tried to explain the present common law system that we have.
ironman1315 - -- Saturday 15 June 2019, at 09:38 pm [ID# 1948230] [reply]
o NEW: Now, let's address your Fourteenth Amendment misinformation. (long)
ironman1315 - -- Saturday 15 June 2019, at 09:57 pm [ID# 1948232] [reply]
(1)
Zeous icon NEW: You're right, it didn't make "people" subjects, it made "persons" subjects. This is so boring. (nm)
Zeous - -- Tuesday 18 June 2019, at 12:54 am [ID# 1948302] [reply]
o NEW: You have a hard time with the English language, don't you?
ironman1315 - -- Tuesday 18 June 2019, at 09:30 am [ID# 1948304] [reply]
Zeous icon NEW: And be a person, and automatically makes every person "born" a citizen subject. What is the difference between person and people? In both legalese and common English (short)
Zeous - -- Thursday 20 June 2019, at 08:52 am [ID# 1948384] [reply]
<< Previous Home Next >>
Prev Index Next
Log in!
Username or email
Password
Remember me

Forgot your password?

> Become a Member...

Business Directory
-->

DISCLAIMER: UteFans.Net is not affiliated with the University of Utah, except that the owner, operators and contributing members are students, alumni, and rabid fans of the U. Additionally, the owner and operators of Utefans.Net are not responsible for the actions of those who use this public forum. By contributing to this forum you agree to abide by the Rules of Conduct outlined on the Post Message page.

Forum - Boardmail - Profile - Schedule - Events - Photos - Archive - Quotable - Join!
Home | About Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | News | Contact Us

Copyright (C) 1998-2019 Utefans LC. All rights reserved. Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.