Jury_Nullification

Jury Nullification Paula Hess, Carriss Austin, Natasha Porter, Sarah Wyatt, LaToya Baskerville CKA 344/Cultural Diversity in Criminal Justice December 19, 2011 Stephen Humphries Jury Nullification Race-based jury nullification is a controversial topic. The arguments both for and against the practice are enough to get one thinking about the entire process. Recent history has given us some interesting examples of how race-based jury nullification can affect the outcome of a criminal trial. Based upon all information presented, choosing a position about race-based jury nullification is difficult. What is Jury Nullification' According to Multiculturalism in the Criminal Justice System, jury nullification allows juries to acquit a defendant even if the facts and evidence of the case say they should do otherwise (MacNamara & Burns, 2009, p 265). However, this brings about the question of whether black juries should acquit other blacks because of the perception of blacks being mistreated by the criminal justice system. In Defense of Race-based Jury Nullification Article-based Defense Jury nullification occurs when a jury comes to a verdict of not guilty even when it is contrary to the facts that point to a different and more obvious guilty. Race-based jury nullifications occur when the jury is compromised of citizens of mostly one particular race who comes to the same type of verdict, but seemingly more in favor of the defendant who is of the same race as the majority of the jurors. The first example shows that there are many clear occurrences of this kind of legal outcome. As stated in the U.S. News & World Report (Leo, 1995), “Enormous injustices were inflicted on blacks over the years, and not just in the south, where blacks accused of attacking whites were almost automatically convicted. But as the system has changed, with more black jurors showing up, a different kind of racial surprise appeared.” This publication makes a defining note of the miscarriages of justice that have occurred towards blacks in the past during the civil rights movements and slavery and furthermore it shows how these injustices have most likely caused blacks to retaliate in the one area they feel they have been wronged the most, the criminal justice field. This example points out the fact that in the past many blacks did not appear when summoned for jury duty, but as the times start to change, and more blacks show up to serve as jurors, these race-based jury nullifications have become a more common occurrence. Race-based jury nullifications do not always come as a result of juries sharing the same skin color with the defendant facing conviction. These types of jury nullification can also come in the form of sharing a common hatred or disgust with the defendant or their victim(s), simply because of their status in a country. In this particular example, the victims happened to be immigrants. As stated in the USA Today Magazine (Leipold, 1997), “Although there is compelling evidence linking the defendants to the vandalism, they have the good fortune of being tried by a jury that shares their dislike of immigrants.” This publication makes a point to show that in either case, the jury feels some type of common bond with the defendant and therefore cannot bring themselves to convict them for their beliefs, no matter how wrong it may be according to the law. Positive Contemporary Examples Jurors can also use their right of nullification by sending messages to those involved in the case, for example, the prosecutor, regarding misplaced enforcement priorities they might find along the way. To some, jury nullification also helps keep the court system from becoming too rigid. If jurors know their rights, and understand their power, as well as using it wisely, than that can allow some play in the joints for justice. For some people there have probably been times when he or she says to themselves, “I do not care if it is right or wrong to anyone else, it is right to me. That is all that matters.” Usually when someone thinks something like that is because something has happened to cause his or her emotions to run high, and this or her emotions are doing all the thinking, no matter how rational or irrational it may seem at the time. Depending on what action or actions take place and whether or not those actions are legal or illegal would all depend on what kind of consequences would be paid in the end, if any. Another positive attribute for jury nullification thought, is that “the jury cannot be punished and cannot be overruled” (Shecket, M. 1999). That alone can have its negatives; however, the positives are there as well. If more people stood up for what they believe to be right, instead of worrying about what others might have to say, and those who stood up for what they believe were jurors, there would probably be some cases out there that would have ended differently than the way they did. Race-based Jury Nullification: A Bad Idea Article-based Arguments In the Scottsboro Trial in the 1931, there were nine African American teenaged males charged with raping two females. This happened after the African American males fought with white males. The nine males were arrested and convicted on rape charges, which in the 1930’s was punishable by death (Leo, 1995). Fifteen years later, after several appeals, only one of the nine men made it out of prison alive. It seems Alabama admitted they gave the youths an unfair trial. Paul Butler was arrested and charged with assault. He went to trial and a D.C cop took the stand and lied. Jurors acquitted him of all charges (Perna, 2009). The reason was not because of the cop lying; but because the panel was all black men, and black jurors will never send another black man to jail/prison even when the evidence is stacked against them. There are reasons why individuals are against jury nullification, and with that said here are some examples. One being that there could be a possibly of setting a guilty individual free. The second being jurors use their own personal feelings instead of the facts presented by the court. The third is creating an extremely biased jury (Linder, 2001). When the jury finds someone not guilty because they disagree with the law, it is outside the purview of the jury. The judge will then determine the issue of law and its interpretation, and the jury is there to decide the issue of the facts. So despite the burden of proof, some jurors will elect not to convict or convict a person based on skin color. Negative Contemporary Examples Race-based jury nullification can occur and does in some cases, and the effects can be both positive and negative; though hose effects vary depending on which side you talk to. Jury nullification is bad enough without race involved, but with race involved, it becomes a completely different entity. Race-based jury nullification has resulted in an innocent verdict when clearly the defendant was guilty, and in some cases has resulted in a guilty verdict of an innocent defendant. The details vary in each case, but the effects do not. In one example of jury nullification, a group of men are charged with vandalizing a store owned by immigrants. There is strong evidence linking them to the vandalism, but because the jury has the same disdain for the group the immigrants belong to, the defendants walk free of the charges in court. Another example of jury nullification is from 1991 when Yankel Rosenbaum, a Jewish scholar, was stabbed to death in Brooklyn by a group of black people. Their motivation was that a black child had been run over by a Jewish motorcade and died. The victim lived long enough to identify his attacker, who was tried and acquitted of murder by a jury that consisted mostly of blacks. Later the jury went to party with the defendant to celebrate his victory with him. Each of these examples shows that when a jury consists mainly of people who are liked-minded or like-raced to either side in court, the results of the trial can be swayed either one way or another. If the jury feels the same as the defendant, the chances of him or her being convicted of the crime decrease. If the jury feels the same as the defense, or has a general disdain for the person being tried for a crime, he or she will not only be found guilty, but will likely be given a stiffer sentence. In some cases a jury can find a defendant guilty of a crime, even if he or she may not have met the requirements, for instance, murder rather than manslaughter. The Team Position The issue of jury nullification is a difficult one to take a position on. However, after a brief discussion in the Learning Team A discussion forum, the team has agreed that it will take a neutral position. There is a great deal of convincing evidence on both sides of the issue that support a neutral position. One issue team members agreed upon was that jury nullification can be good or bad, depending upon the circumstances of the individual case. For instance, a black jury may choose to acquit a black defendant who was obviously guilty because he or she may have been the victim of police officers not following proper police procedures. This, of course, could be considered racial bias because both the jury and the defendant were of the same race. This example could be a good thing because police did not follow proper procedure in the case. However, this example could also be a bad thing. Both the jury and the defendant were of the same race causing others to think the jury was biased because of the racial issue. As this example demonstrates, depending on how one looks at it, the jury nullification of the case is both good and bad. Thus, the reason this Learning Team chooses to uphold a neutral position on jury nullification. References Leipold, A. (1997). Jury nullification: A perversion of justice' USA Today Magazine, 126(2668), p 30. Retrieved December 13, 2011 from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1272/is_n2628_v126/ai_19782190/. Leo, J. (1995, October 8). The color of law. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved December 13, 2011 from http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/articles/951016/archive_033097.htm. Linder, D. (2001). Jury nullification. Retrieved December 14, 2011 from http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/zenger/nullification.html. MacNamara, R., & Burns, R., (2009). Multiculturalism in the criminal justice system. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Perna, L. (2009). The case for race-based jury nullification. Civil Rights. Retrieved December 14, 2011 from http://www.News.change.org. Shecket, M. (1999). Cases and materials on criminal law. Retrieved December 14, 2011 from http://lawschool.mikeshecket.com/criminallaw/jurynullification.html.