Too many of the potential jurors said that even if the defendant, Elisa Meadows, was guilty, they were unwilling to issue the $500 fine a city attorney was seeking, said Ren Rideauxx, Meadows’ attorney.

  • orclev@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    From what I understand it depends on the jurisdiction. Some places nothing happens, other places they’ll declare a mistrial and select from a new jury pool. Yet others they’ll slap you with a charge of contempt of court or possibly jury tampering.

    • Hupf@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It is contempt of a court of law to

      checks notes

      broaden the involved parties’ knowledge of the law.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Ultimately it comes down to a subtle but important disagreement about what exactly the role of a juror is. For supporters of jury nullification, a juror determines if someone is guilty or innocent. For opponents of jury nullification a juror determines if someone broke the letter of the law or not. Those that think a juror only decides if a law was broken or not feel it’s the judges duty to determine guilt or innocence based on the juries findings. The contempt of court charge is for essentially stepping out of your lane and taking power from the judge.

        Personally I find it a weak argument, it has always I feel been the intent that jurors judge guilt or innocence. Specifically they decide if not just the letter but the spirit of the law has been violated, or in the case of an unjust law if no guilt is possible.