The Journals of Justus Agenstum: A Journey Thru The Judicial System #2

In the first segment of this serialized submission, we discussed the initial stages of being charged with a criminal offense, and the early procedures employed by members of the judicial system in the form of plea bargains. In this segment we are going to discuss the favorable aspects of electing to take your case to jury trial. As linked to in the previous segment, an astounding 90%+ of criminal cases NEVER see a date with a jury trial. Let that sink in for a minute; more than 90% of all cases involving a criminal charge are plea bargained directly into convictions for lesser crimes. This means that the suspect was manipulated into accepting a conviction to a lesser crime without ever having their case heard by a jury of their peers.

So, why would an individual want to decline a plea bargain and elect to take the case to trial? Well, for starters, a jury trial offers a 50-50 chance of exonerating the suspect entirely, as opposed to accepting a stacked deck that offers nothing more than a guaranteed, 100% chance of being convicted of something...anything. Therefore, by simply electing to go to trial the suspect has immediately reduced their chances of a conviction, statistically speaking of course. While there is plenty of information online that show high conviction rates for jury trials, what those numbers fail to take into account is the infrequency at which cases actually go to trial.

Another reason to consider taking your case to jury trial is because the US Constitution actually guarantees each and every citizen the right to just such a platform to determine justice fairly, by public trial, with impartiality, quickly, with right to legal counsel and the ability to examine both adverse and favorable witnesses. By engaging these rights to the fullest extent of the law, the suspect rejects judicial manipulation in favor of peer reviewed results, and fosters the format by which our founding fathers determined fairness and equality for all. In contrast, by accepting a plea bargain, the suspect fosters the format favored by the federal and state government to corruptly compile statistics that are then used to strip away more rights from individual citizens.

One of the most important factors of a jury trial, which judges and lawyers will not discuss in an open court room, is the ability of a jury to nullify laws. Go ahead, take a moment and let that sentence digest. Each and every jury, formed within the US judicial system, has the ability to nullify any and all laws it determines to be morally, and/or constitutionally objectionable. This is known as jury nullification, and when properly employed, it can work in favor of the suspect.

That being said, make no mistake about it, "jury nullification" is a taboo subject in, as well as around, court rooms all across America. Judges and prosecuting attorneys absolutely despise anyone who attempts in any way, shape, or form to educate the masses about their Constitutionally protected rights to nullify laws while sitting on a jury. The mere mention of "jury nullification" in a court room while jury selection is underway, will get the individual uttering those words immediately removed from the pool, and may very well result in Contempt of Court charges being brought against the individual.

In short, jury nullification occurs when the sitting jury agrees to dismiss charges against a suspect when they feel the charges are unjustified for any number of reasons. This, in essence, means that even though laws may be "on the books," and the suspect is guilty of breaking them, the jury feels that extenuating circumstances warrant the result of "not guilty," or the jury agrees that the laws broken are themselves morally, and/or Constitutionally, unjust. In a perfect world jury nullification would be used to nullify cases involving criminal charges against people guilty of committing "victim-less" crimes.

Can jury nullification be used to return unfair results? Of course it can. Like everything else that works for the benefit of the flock, it can be used to upset the apple cart, so to speak. In fact, history is ripe with stories that depict abhorrent applications of jury nullification. All white juries almost always found abusive slave owners "not guilty" of committing crimes against slaves, as slaves were seen as secondary citizens. In modern times, the process by which juries are selected almost always guarantees a vast mixture of peers from the local community, thereby reducing the ability for a jury to be selected for the sole purpose of engaging in jury nullification proceedings.

Stay tuned for The Journals of Justus Agenstum: A Journey Thru The Judicial System #3, where we discuss who should take full advantage of jury trials in hopes of experiencing jury nullification results.

The Journals of Justus Agenstum: A Journey Thru The Judicial System #1 can be read here.