|
Termyn8or -> RE: 4th Branch of Government, you knew right? (2/2/2011 12:40:54 AM)
|
How about less talk and more action. I am not being cynical. People really do need to know this, so what to do ? Posting it on a BDSM forum is not quite the way to do it. Not that you shouldn't, but these facts must be known to alot more people. Extant facts are that if the jury knew their power they would take a bit of the edge out of the pocket of prosecutors. It's been clear that there is alot of collusion between prosecutors and judges. It is also apparent that there are so many laws on the books that abuse by selective enforcement happens alot more than people think.
So unlike those with their thoughts etched in stone, I'll go with this. Normally, registered voters are the ones selected for jury duty. Unfortunately that mean that they support the system as it is, which could cut both ways. But if we are to respect the real law, we have to take it as it comes.
Lists of registered voters can be had. It's not the easiest thing in the world, but it's a start. Now with a printer, I don't mean a $59 inkjet piece of shit, I mean taking the master copy to a printing company, we could engage in direct mail. Direct mail is a bit more respected than flyers and such. The only better thing would be to put the message on the idiot box, or a less costly alternative would be the radio. The idea is to reach the most people as possible.
But once that's done you do open the door to abuse by the juries themselves. If you think that it won't happen you should tell me about your planet. There is some question as to whether we can trust juries, but the law is the law. I say let the chips fall.
Twenty nine years ago I got my first DUI, they were called DWIs then, it's been awhile. The judge ? Well the judge had just had his daughter killed by a drunk druiver, and this was not a random stop. I demolished a fella's pickup truck. Now what do you think was going through my head at the time ? All these lawyers would charge me tens of thousands of dollars, and I would be fucked anyway. I found the right one, and skated.
If I had pulled a jury who do you think I might get ? A bunch of partyying motherfuckers like me ? I doubt it. In fact being a mayor's court, some of them probably voted for him and maybe even knew him or his daughter personally. What do you think they would've done ?
So realize what this entails.
What if a guy, not an addict was caught with drugs ? People get addicted to drugs all the time. Say the guy is just a weekend partier and went to pick up a little coke. Now let's say that one jurer had a child die from a coke overdose, and a couple of others have kids who are struggling with that problem. What is to counteract that ? What keeps it fair ? If the defendant proves it is an occasional thing, and there is no problem, no victim and therefore no crime as per the Gonzalez case, now the defense is throwing up the inadequacies of the jurer's ability to teach their kids not to fall into such a trap - right in their faces. How do you think they are going to feel ?
How much confidence do you have in the average person to weigh the evidence properly and acquit because no vicitm exists ? Really.
Actually, maybe the place to do this is in closing arguments of a trial. Any competent defense attourney should mention jury nullification in the closing argument, but that is forbidden. How can they forbid something like that when a person is on trial for their freedom (from actual incarceration) or their very life (like in a capital case) ?
And even if it was changed, would it really do much good in a dog eat dog world ? In a world in which your neighbor thinks he might shoot you over a parking spot if not for gun control ? Where they will risk the lives of 20 people or so on the highway to make sure you don't get in front of them ? Where they play office politics and steal credit for good work whenever they can ?
I'm with you on this, but I just don't have enough of confiodence in human nature to think that it will do much good. Not that it doesn't need to be done, it does. But what good will probably come of it ? The sheeple really do need strong, severe and complete guidance. They do not posess the capacity to rule. And when you are on a jury that is effectively what you must do. To keep fairnees above all other things. To administer true justice.
Do you trust registered voters to do that ?
T^
|
|
|
|
