Defensive Carry banner

Is Trial by Jury assured in your State [b]and[/b] does Jury Nullification happen?

  • Yes [b]both[/b] Trial by Jury is assured [b]and[/b] Jury Nullification happens

    Votes: 3 33.3%
  • Trial by Jury is assured [b]but[/b] Jury Nullification can't happen because (please post why)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Trial by Jury is assured [b]but[/b] Jury Nullification very rare, albeit possible

    Votes: 6 66.7%
  • Trial by Jury is not assured

    Votes: 0 0.0%

Trial by Jury & Jury Nulification -- Poll

939 views 10 replies 7 participants last post by  SelfDefense 
#1 ·
From time-to-time number of us have said,
"I'd rather be judged by 12 men than carried by 6."

Another concept I and other use is "Jury Nullification."

In a private message, I have been told that these concepts may not apply in every State.

So, I'd like to try my First Poll.


BTW -- I'm not sure that the "courts" fit under the "Law Enforcement" element here, or if this thread should be under another sub-forum. So please move if needed.
 
#2 ·
Your poll hasn't posted yet. There seems to be a site problem right now---might try back later? I see your post replicated itself--I think. Taking a long time to load pages or make posts. Give it some time.
 
#3 ·
#4 ·
Things seem better now--took a fifteen minute break. Interesting question I don't know the answers to----yet. I'll have to research my state's position on this.

Still looking but found this interesting!
fija

Sec. 7. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, and shall
extend to all cases at law, without regard to the amount in
controversy; but a jury trial may be waived by the parties
in allcases, in the manner prescribed by law.
http://www.harbornet.com/rights/arkansas.txt
 
#5 ·
From the Appalachian Mountains of SWVA

Constitution of Virginia

Section 8. Criminal prosecutions.

That in criminal prosecutions a man hath a right to demand the cause and nature of his accusation, to be confronted with the accusers and witnesses, and to call for evidence in his favor, and he shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of his vicinage, without whose unanimous consent he cannot be found guilty. He shall not be deprived of life or liberty, except by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers, nor be compelled in any criminal proceeding to give evidence against himself, nor be put twice in jeopardy for the same offense.

Laws may be enacted providing for the trial of offenses not felonious by a court not of record without a jury, preserving the right of the accused to an appeal to and a trial by jury in some court of record having original criminal jurisdiction. Laws may also provide for juries consisting of less than twelve, but not less than five, for the trial of offenses not felonious, and may classify such cases, and prescribe the number of jurors for each class.

In criminal cases, the accused may plead guilty. If the accused plead not guilty, he may, with his consent and the concurrence of the Commonwealth's Attorney and of the court entered of record, be tried by a smaller number of jurors, or waive a jury. In case of such waiver or plea of guilty, the court shall try the case.

The provisions of this section shall be self-executing.
I don't know what happens in West-Washington DC (a.k.a. NOVA), or some of the other "Metro" areas, but in the Appalachians "Jury Nullification" does happen, from time-to-time.

Got to go get ready for Church but look forward to hearing from other areas later in the day/week.
 
#7 ·
Jury nullification is an extremely risky bet for those forced to use it.

Better that people be educated on their use of force laws for their area and know how to apply them to situations they get into than act from misinformation and have to rely on jury nullification.
 
#8 ·
I don't guess that I fully understand the meaning of this poll.

I don't know of any state that doesn't allow a jury trial. So that part of the question would unquestionably be yes.

There are in fact cases where there has been jury nullification, so that too exists.

Is the point of the poll to ask which one we would rely upon in forced to use deadly force to protect ourselves or another?

If that is the point of the question/poll then there should be another line that gives the option of saying that we will rely on our knowledge and understanding of our state's laws in regards to self defense etc.
 
#9 ·
I don't guess that I fully understand the meaning of this poll.

I don't know of any state that doesn't allow a jury trial. So that part of the question would unquestionably be yes.
Obviously, the poll was a misfire -- or was at best a squib. :embarassed:

In another thread and in subsequent PMs a member assured me that in his State some firearms and other "lose of liberty" infractions were handled without the right of a trial-by-jury.

I was not proposing relying on Jury nullification -- for as MitchellCT pointed out:
Jury nullification is an extremely risky bet
However, I was wondering if other States had the State Constitution protection, or prevailing Judicial practice, for/of the protection which we enjoy here in Virginia. :hand10:

Or, had the practice in some States (as described earlier) of no right to a jury-trial in "lesser crimes" eroded that right/protection all the way to "lose of liberty" offences. :hand1:

Also, some other posts suggested that Jury Nullification is not allowed in their State.

As I see it, Jury Nullification, under common law, as an essential element of the protection. So, I included that option. IMHO, the "right of a trial-by-jury" would become proforma farce, were the jury were absolutely locked into "If 'A' then you must 'B'."

Well it misfired.

However, I would love to get a better picture of the "state of health" of the combined processes across the States.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top