Jury Nullification

In society, a jury has the power to return a "not guilty" verdict even when the defendant is clearly guilty. In cases like this, the jury may decide that the law broken is unjust. Other times, it may be completely bias against the subjects in question. For example, during the Civil Rights era, an all white jury may find another white man innocent, even if he clearly lynched an African American. This power is called jury nullification and is not a justified response to any verdict.

One of the main concerns of jury nullification is that it allows the people to take the law into their own hands. For an example one can imagine a wife being beaten and abused by her husband. He makes her life a living hell and bosses her around. One day she snaps and is unable to take the pressure of his tyranny. After all the stress builds up, she ends up murdering him in his sleep. When standing trial the jury may feel sorry for the defendant. Though her actions may appear as self defense on the ability for her to life a happy life, she still had committed cold blood murder. She could have gone to the police about her husband. No matter the circumstance nobody should be able to take the law into their own hands.

Before a trail, a jury member must swear to an oath state that he or she is to uphold the law based on facts and not be personal beliefs. By keeping personal beliefs out, the court abolishes any possible biasness in the decision. They should apply the same way for every man in order for every man to be equal. Each jury is given a set of instructions. The instructions act as guidelines to help them deliver a fair verdict. They point out that if the jury believes one truth, then they must find a certain verdict. If the jury believes a different truth, then they must find a different verdict. The role of the jury isn't to make up laws that they feel is right, their job is to apply the laws already voted on by determining whether

...