|
|
Posted by Mark Jones on 11/07/06 04:36
Citizen Bob wrote:
> On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 00:22:17 GMT, "Mark Jones"
> <noemail@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> A conviction of a pot grower was recently overturned by a
>> federal appeals court because a juror was told that she would
>> get in trouble if she didn't follow the judges instructions exactly.
>> Here is what one of the appeals court judges had to say:
>
>> "Jurors cannot fairly determine the outcome of a case if they
>> believe they will face 'trouble' for a conclusion they reach as
>> jurors," said the opinion by Judge Betty Fletcher. "The threat
>> of punishment works a coercive influence on the jury's
>> independence."
>
> Can you comment on how this affects the ruling in the Kriho case.
If she lied before she was sworn in as a juror, I can see how
she would be in trouble. It all depends upon the questions that
were asked of her prior to jury selection. If she always told the
truth to every question she was asked, it isn't her fault if the
lawyers or judge failed to ask the right questions.
I wouldn't want to have to decide a case like this because it
is one of those that sounds like jury nullification, but looks
like it could have been intentional to throw the trial before
it even started. This is a tough one, no matter what decision
is reached.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|