Be There
Michael Denny
Live and Let Live www.LiveandLetLive.orghttp://www.LiveandLetLive.org
Libertarian Party of San Francisco www.LPSF.orghttp://www.LPSF.org
No On Prop A www.badsfbonds.blogspot.comhttp://www.badsfbonds.blogspot.com
www.DennyForMayor.comhttp://www.dennyformayor.com/
(415) 608-0269
mike@Dennz.commailto:mike@Dennz.com
Thanks, Mike. I created a Meetup for this demonstration:
Who else is planning on going? I was at an event in the Mission today where people made signs…
There’s also a protest at the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center (I believe at the SF end of the bridge) from noon-2pm on Sunday, August 29. Anyone going to that one? If you’re driving, I could use a ride.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
On Aug 22, 2021, at 9:38 PM, mike@dennz.com via LPSF Forum wrote:
dennz
August 23
Be ThereMichael Denny
Live and Let Live www.LiveandLetLive.orghttp://www.LiveandLetLive.org
Libertarian Party of San Francisco www.LPSF.orghttp://www.LPSF.org
No On Prop A www.badsfbonds.blogspot.comhttp://www.badsfbonds.blogspot.com
www.DennyForMayor.comhttp://www.dennyformayor.com/
(415) 608-0269
mike@Dennz.commailto:mike@Dennz.comVisit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
I was thinking of going. I’m on call for jury duty this week. If I don’t have to report I wanted to go. Would be cool to see you guys.
Kevin
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 23, 2021, at 12:20 AM, Starchild via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org wrote:
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Mike. I created a Meetup for this demonstration:Meetup
Health & Freedom Rally: Support Federal/State/City Employees Against…
Fri, Aug 27, 2021, 12:00 PM: Government employees typically have a lot to answer for. They are often involved with carrying out and enforcing the tyrannical laws and policies, and imposing the burdens
Who else is planning on going? I was at an event in the Mission today where people made signs…
There’s also a protest at the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center (I believe at the SF end of the bridge) from noon-2pm on Sunday, August 29. Anyone going to that one? If you’re driving, I could use a ride.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
Thanks, Kevin. Jury duty is important. If you’re chosen to sit on a jury, you could have the opportunity to save someone spending years behind bars for something that’s not a real crime, and send police and prosecutors a message that they are wasting their time to arrest and persecute people for victimless “crimes” like drug use, prostitution, weapons possession, tax evasion, etc.
So I wouldn’t encourage you to skip out on a jury summons to join us, but if you aren’t called, I hope to see you there!
However I do urge you or anyone else who’s unfamiliar with jury nullification/juror rights to check out FIJA.org (the Fully Informed Jury Association) and learn about how you do NOT have to blindly follow judges’ instructions, but rather you can vote to acquit not only when there is reasonable doubt that a defendant broke the law, but also when it is a bad law, or it is being unfairly enforced. You can do this by simply maintaining, to other jurors and to the court, that you believe there is reasonable doubt, and then vote “Not Guilty”. If you do not go any further in explaining your reasoning, there is nothing those in power can do about it.
Historically, this has been an important protection the people have against the enforcement of bad laws. It was used to fight against the return of runaway slaves and other legal abuses. But most judges not only won’t tell you about this power, they will try to mislead you into thinking that you do not have it, and that you must follow the law strictly as they explain it to you.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
On Aug 23, 2021, at 7:09 AM, Kevin M McLoone via LPSF Forum wrote:
Devoted2022
August 23
I was thinking of going. I’m on call for jury duty this week. If I don’t have to report I wanted to go. Would be cool to see you guys.Kevin
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.In Reply To
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Mike. I created a Meetup for this demonstration: Who else is planning on going? I was at an event in the Mission today where people made signs… There’s also a protest at the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center (I believe at the SF end of the bridge) from noon-2pm on Sunday, August 29. Anyo…
Previous RepliesStarchild
August 23
Thanks, Mike. I created a Meetup for this demonstration:Meetup
Health & Freedom Rally: Support Federal/State/City Employees Against…
Fri, Aug 27, 2021, 12:00 PM: Government employees typically have a lot to answer for. They are often involved with carrying out and enforcing the tyrannical laws and policies, and imposing the burdens
Who else is planning on going? I was at an event in the Mission today where people made signs…
There’s also a protest at the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center (I believe at the SF end of the bridge) from noon-2pm on Sunday, August 29. Anyone going to that one? If you’re driving, I could use a ride.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
dennz
August 23
Be ThereMichael Denny
Live and Let Live www.LiveandLetLive.orghttp://www.LiveandLetLive.org
Libertarian Party of San Francisco www.LPSF.orghttp://www.LPSF.org
No On Prop A www.badsfbonds.blogspot.comhttp://www.badsfbonds.blogspot.com
www.DennyForMayor.comhttp://www.dennyformayor.com/
(415) 608-0269
mike@Dennz.commailto:mike@Dennz.comVisit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
I’ll check that out. It’s just a civil summons, but I always make sure I go if I’m summoned. I never get chosen though. Maybe this time.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 23, 2021, at 2:20 PM, Starchild via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org wrote:
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Kevin. Jury duty is important. If you’re chosen to sit on a jury, you could have the opportunity to save someone spending years behind bars for something that’s not a real crime, and send police and prosecutors a message that they are wasting their time to arrest and persecute people for victimless “crimes” like drug use, prostitution, weapons possession, tax evasion, etc.So I wouldn’t encourage you to skip out on a jury summons to join us, but if you aren’t called, I hope to see you there!
However I do urge you or anyone else who’s unfamiliar with jury nullification/juror rights to check out FIJA.org (the Fully Informed Jury Association) and learn about how you do NOT have to blindly follow judges’ instructions, but rather you can vote to acquit not only when there is reasonable doubt that a defendant broke the law, but also when it is a bad law, or it is being unfairly enforced. You can do this by simply maintaining, to other jurors and to the court, that you believe there is reasonable doubt, and then vote “Not Guilty”. If you do not go any further in explaining your reasoning, there is nothing those in power can do about it.
Historically, this has been an important protection the people have against the enforcement of bad laws. It was used to fight against the return of runaway slaves and other legal abuses. But most judges not only won’t tell you about this power, they will try to mislead you into thinking that you do not have it, and that you must follow the law strictly as they explain it to you.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
I don’t want to hijack this thread too much, but I will add 2 points from my personal experience exercising this power. First, more than mislead, don’t be surprised if the judge actively denies you have this power. And second, be careful going toe-to-toe with a judge. They can slap you with a contempt-of-court charge at the drop of a hat. And though it may not stick, you probably don’t want the hassle. Don’t run your mouth. And don’t turn a 1-person rescue into a 2-person rescue.
I concur….save your power for persuasion with the other members of the jury. For this you first have to be selected. Jurors are often easily persuaded by a persistent thoughtful argument. I once single-handedly turned a jury against a “Hate Crime” charge.
Mike
From: noca via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 2:40 PM
To: mike@dennz.com
Subject: Re: [LPSF Forum] [Discussion] Protest Mandatory Vax Friday August 27th noon City Hall
[https://forum.lpsf.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/n/b5a626/45.png]
Nocahttps://forum.lpsf.org/u/noca
August 23
I don’t want to hijack this thread too much, but I will add 2 points from my personal experience exercising this power. First, more than mislead, don’t be surprised if the judge actively denies that you have this power. And second, be careful going toe-to-toe with a judge. They can slap you with a contempt of court charge at the the drop of a hat. And though it may not stick, you probably don’t want the hassle. Don’t run your mouth. And don’t turn a 1-person rescue into a 2-person rescue.
Visit Topichttps://forum.lpsf.org/t/protest-mandatory-vax-friday-august-27th-noon-city-hall/21583/6 or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click herehttps://forum.lpsf.org/email/unsubscribe/cc9b1d7e74f55c666b3cdfab5577809f0fc4df448c5373dc751820f27ff0903c.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click herehttps://forum.lpsf.org/signup.
Nice. Now I wish it was a criminal summons. I’ve never been picked ever, but I always don’t hide from it or try to get out of being picked. One day I’ll get picked I’m thinking.
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 23, 2021, at 2:52 PM, mike@dennz.com via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org wrote:
dennz
August 23
I concur….save your power for persuasion with the other members of the jury. For this you first have to be selected. Jurors are often easily persuaded by a persistent thoughtful argument. I once single-handedly turned a jury against a “Hate Crime” charge.Mike
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
Kevin,
To rarely be selected is as a juror after being summoned is totally normal. Although I have occasionally wondered whether I was blacklisted for a while after being kicked off a jury some years ago. Supposedly it’s typical to get a summons about once a year (as I did a few weeks ago), but after the incident where I was actually empaneled and then dismissed on the second day of deliberations (for telling the other jurors about nullification), I wasn’t summoned for some years. When I eventually called the court to check on my status, I found that my name was not on the rolls for jury duty (even though I was continually registered to vote at the same address the entire time). They added me to the rolls again, and subsequently I have been called (although not chosen).
The case where I actually got on a jury was a civil case – a landlord-tenant dispute where the landlord, an older Chinese-American gentleman, was being sued for allegedly harassing the tenant and her visiting boyfriend, and causing her to have to move to a less desirable apartment. Among the allegations was that he broke the law by not providing heat in the apartment as required by city ordinance. Since there was nothing in the rental contract about heat, and the whole case seemed very flimsy to me, I did not think he should be prosecuted for that, and brought up nullification. But one of the other jurors ratted me out to the judge, and he threw me off the jury.
When I subsequently went and visited the landlord (they’d given us his address), he told me some stuff that was a real eye-opener. Apparently his lawyer discovered that the tenant had filed a change-of-address notice with the Post Office before the date of the key incident of alleged harassment, basically blowing the whole case out of the water, but the judge had not allowed that evidence to be presented in court. Nor were they allowed to raise in court the fact that the plaintiff was a serial litigant who had sued dozens of other people over the years. I was more glad than ever for having told them what they wanted to hear during voir dire* in order to get on the jury and help see justice served, and sorry only that I hadn’t been able to help more because I opened my mouth and told my fellow jurors about nullification after we entered deliberations, in the (false as it turned out) belief that once I was a juror, it was a done deal. Live and learn.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
*The process in which prospective jurors are questioned by the court and the attorneys for both sides; libertarian columnist Vin Suprynowicz has half-joked that “voir dire” is Latin for “jury tampering”.
On Aug 23, 2021, at 2:32 PM, Kevin M McLoone via LPSF Forum wrote:
Devoted2022
August 23
I’ll check that out. It’s just a civil summons, but I always make sure I go if I’m summoned. I never get chosen though. Maybe this time.··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.In Reply To
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Kevin. Jury duty is important. If you’re chosen to sit on a jury, you could have the opportunity to save someone spending years behind bars for something that’s not a real crime, and send police and prosecutors a message that they are wasting their time to arrest and persecute people for vic…
Previous RepliesStarchild
August 23
Thanks, Kevin. Jury duty is important. If you’re chosen to sit on a jury, you could have the opportunity to save someone spending years behind bars for something that’s not a real crime, and send police and prosecutors a message that they are wasting their time to arrest and persecute people for victimless “crimes” like drug use, prostitution, weapons possession, tax evasion, etc.So I wouldn’t encourage you to skip out on a jury summons to join us, but if you aren’t called, I hope to see you there!
However I do urge you or anyone else who’s unfamiliar with jury nullification/juror rights to check out FIJA.org (the Fully Informed Jury Association) and learn about how you do NOT have to blindly follow judges’ instructions, but rather you can vote to acquit not only when there is reasonable doubt that a defendant broke the law, but also when it is a bad law, or it is being unfairly enforced. You can do this by simply maintaining, to other jurors and to the court, that you believe there is reasonable doubt, and then vote “Not Guilty”. If you do not go any further in explaining your reasoning, there is nothing those in power can do about it.
Historically, this has been an important protection the people have against the enforcement of bad laws. It was used to fight against the return of runaway slaves and other legal abuses. But most judges not only won’t tell you about this power, they will try to mislead you into thinking that you do not have it, and that you must follow the law strictly as they explain it to you.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Devoted2022
August 23
I was thinking of going. I’m on call for jury duty this week. If I don’t have to report I wanted to go. Would be cool to see you guys.Kevin
··· (click for more details)
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Mike. I created a Meetup for this demonstration:Meetup
Health & Freedom Rally: Support Federal/State/City Employees Against…
Fri, Aug 27, 2021, 12:00 PM: Government employees typically have a lot to answer for. They are often involved with carrying out and enforcing the tyrannical laws and policies, and imposing the burdens
Who else is planning on going? I was at an event in the Mission today where people made signs…
There’s also a protest at the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center (I believe at the SF end of the bridge) from noon-2pm on Sunday, August 29. Anyone going to that one? If you’re driving, I could use a ride.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
dennz
August 23
Be ThereMichael Denny
Live and Let Live www.LiveandLetLive.orghttp://www.LiveandLetLive.org
Libertarian Party of San Francisco www.LPSF.orghttp://www.LPSF.org
No On Prop A www.badsfbonds.blogspot.comhttp://www.badsfbonds.blogspot.com
www.DennyForMayor.comhttp://www.dennyformayor.com/
(415) 608-0269
mike@Dennz.commailto:mike@Dennz.comVisit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.
In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
From: Kevin M McLoone via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 3:02 PM
To: mike@dennz.com
Subject: [LPSF Forum] [Discussion] Protest Mandatory Vax Friday August 27th noon City Hall
[https://forum.lpsf.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/45.png]
Devoted2022https://forum.lpsf.org/u/devoted2022
August 23
Nice. Now I wish it was a criminal summons. I’ve never been picked ever, but I always don’t hide from it or try to get out of being picked. One day I’ll get picked I’m thinking.
··· (click for more details)https://forum.lpsf.org/t/protest-mandatory-vax-friday-august-27th-noon-city-hall/21583/8
Visit Topichttps://forum.lpsf.org/t/protest-mandatory-vax-friday-august-27th-noon-city-hall/21583/8 or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click herehttps://forum.lpsf.org/email/unsubscribe/14e80c05002f0010096fb7867c7646c77a982c83383680ca1dd65f3325cd6c66.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click herehttps://forum.lpsf.org/signup.
I think you would be foolish to mention jury nullification, even if you wanted to use it. Before I turned 70 I was on numerous juries. The judges always said that the jury must decide the case based on the law and the facts. The judge explains the law, but they always said that the jury gets to decide the facts. I never had any problem arguing for “not guilty” based on the facts. Besides that it is not clear to me what relevance jury nullification would have in a civil case, where you are mostly determining if one of the parties breached a contract or violated the other parties rights.
Even in a criminal trial you are better off finding some reasonable doubt as claiming jury nullification will most likely get you kicked off the jury. And then of course you cannot be of any help to the defendant.
dennz
August 23 |
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.
In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
Les On Monday, August 23, 2021, 03:14:01 PM PDT, mike@dennz.com via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org wrote:
Les,
I was not urging Kevin or other potential jurors to “claim jury nullification”, but rather to simply practice it. As my own experience illustrates, openly raising the topic can indeed get you kicked off a jury (or not selected to serve on one). It’s more effective to nullify bad laws, or unfair enforcement of the law, by simply stating that you feel reasonable doubt exists, and voting not guilty. It may make you look foolish in a case where there appears to be no reasonable doubt, but better to look a little foolish and see the cause of justice served. It can be relevant in a civil case – people may be non-criminally penalized for breaking bad laws, or for violating non-existent “rights”, just as they may face criminal penalties for these things. If the application of such penalties in a civil case is unjust, then it’s good to prevent them being inflicted on someone by nullifying (voting to acquit).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
-----Original Message-----
From: LPSF Forum replies+0628ffd627e49707fb12263cdb4908cb@forum.lpsf.org
Sent: Aug 23, 2021 10:08 PM
To: sfdreamer@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: [LPSF Forum] [Discussion] Protest Mandatory Vax Friday August 27th noon City Hall
lesliemangus
August 24I think you would be foolish to mention jury nullification, even if you wanted to use it. Before I turned 70 I was on numerous juries. The judges always said that the jury must decide the case based on the law and the facts. The judge explains the law, but they always said that the jury gets to decide the facts. I never had any problem arguing for “not guilty” based on the facts. Besides that it is not clear to me what relevance jury nullification would have in a civil case, where you are mostly determining if one of the parties breached a contract or violated the other parties rights.
Even in a criminal trial you are better off finding some reasonable doubt as claiming jury nullification will most likely get you kicked off the jury. And then of course you cannot be of any help to the defendant.
dennz
August 23 |
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.
In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
In Reply Todennz
August 23I concur….save your power for persuasion with the other members of the jury. For this you first have to be selected. Jurors are often easily persuaded by a persistent thoughtful argument. I once single-handedly turned a jury against a “Hate Crime” charge. Mike ··· (click for more details)
Previous Repliesdennz
August 23It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.
In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Starchild
August 23Kevin,
To rarely be selected is as a juror after being summoned is totally normal. Although I have occasionally wondered whether I was blacklisted for a while after being kicked off a jury some years ago. Supposedly it’s typical to get a summons about once a year (as I did a few weeks ago), but after the incident where I was actually empaneled and then dismissed on the second day of deliberations (for telling the other jurors about nullification), I wasn’t summoned for some years. When I eventually called the court to check on my status, I found that my name was not on the rolls for jury duty (even though I was continually registered to vote at the same address the entire time). They added me to the rolls again, and subsequently I have been called (although not chosen).
The case where I actually got on a jury was a civil case – a landlord-tenant dispute where the landlord, an older Chinese-American gentleman, was being sued for allegedly harassing the tenant and her visiting boyfriend, and causing her to have to move to a less desirable apartment. Among the allegations was that he broke the law by not providing heat in the apartment as required by city ordinance. Since there was nothing in the rental contract about heat, and the whole case seemed very flimsy to me, I did not think he should be prosecuted for that, and brought up nullification. But one of the other jurors ratted me out to the judge, and he threw me off the jury.
When I subsequently went and visited the landlord (they’d given us his address), he told me some stuff that was a real eye-opener. Apparently his lawyer discovered that the tenant had filed a change-of-address notice with the Post Office before the date of the key incident of alleged harassment, basically blowing the whole case out of the water, but the judge had not allowed that evidence to be presented in court. Nor were they allowed to raise in court the fact that the plaintiff was a serial litigant who had sued dozens of other people over the years. I was more glad than ever for having told them what they wanted to hear during voir dire* in order to get on the jury and help see justice served, and sorry only that I hadn’t been able to help more because I opened my mouth and told my fellow jurors about nullification after we entered deliberations, in the (false as it turned out) belief that once I was a juror, it was a done deal. Live and learn.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
*The process in which prospective jurors are questioned by the court and the attorneys for both sides; libertarian columnist Vin Suprynowicz has half-joked that “voir dire” is Latin for “jury tampering”.
··· (click for more details)
Devoted2022
August 23Nice. Now I wish it was a criminal summons. I’ve never been picked ever, but I always don’t hide from it or try to get out of being picked. One day I’ll get picked I’m thinking.
··· (click for more details)
dennz
August 23I concur….save your power for persuasion with the other members of the jury. For this you first have to be selected. Jurors are often easily persuaded by a persistent thoughtful argument. I once single-handedly turned a jury against a “Hate Crime” charge.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Noca
August 23I don’t want to hijack this thread too much, but I will add 2 points from my personal experience exercising this power. First, more than mislead, don’t be surprised if the judge actively denies you have this power. And second, be careful going toe-to-toe with a judge. They can slap you with a contempt-of-court charge at the drop of a hat. And though it may not stick, you probably don’t want the hassle. Don’t run your mouth. And don’t turn a 1-person rescue into a 2-person rescue.
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
I have no idea what your first sentence means. I said that you are foolish to mention jury nullification.
Your comment suggests that only laws that YOU think are bad will be nullified. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that guarantee the right to own a gun or the right to free speech could be nullified as well.
The theory of “jury nullification” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Les Mangus
Starchild
August 25 |
Les,
I was not urging Kevin or other potential jurors to “claim jury nullification”, but rather to simply practice it. As my own experience illustrates, openly raising the topic can indeed get you kicked off a jury (or not selected to serve on one). It’s more effective to nullify bad laws, or unfair enforcement of the law, by simply stating that you feel reasonable doubt exists, and voting not guilty. It may make you look foolish in a case where there appears to be no reasonable doubt, but better to look a little foolish and see the cause of justice served. It can be relevant in a civil case – people may be non-criminally penalized for breaking bad laws, or for violating non-existent “rights”, just as they may face criminal penalties for these things. If the application of such penalties in a civil case is unjust, then it’s good to prevent them being inflicted on someone by nullifying (voting to acquit).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
On Tuesday, August 24, 2021, 08:36:40 PM PDT, Starchild via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org wrote:
Les,
Allow me to paraphrase your comment below to apply its logic to another topic we recently discussed, the desirability of government:
Your comments (defending the institution of government) suggest that only laws that YOU think are good will be adopted. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that legalize chattel slavery or allow you to be summarily jailed on the allegation of a government official can be passed as well. The theory of “let’s trust government to keep us safe and do our bidding” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Sound reasonable? 
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
On Aug 31, 2021, at 1:55 PM, Leslie Mangus via LPSF Forum wrote:
lesliemangus
August 31
I have no idea what your first sentence means. I said that you are foolish to mention jury nullification.
Your comment suggests that only laws that YOU think are bad will be nullified. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that guarantee the right to own a gun or the right to free speech could be nullified as well.
The theory of “jury nullification” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Les MangusStarchild
August 25 |
Les,I was not urging Kevin or other potential jurors to “claim jury nullification”, but rather to simply practice it. As my own experience illustrates, openly raising the topic can indeed get you kicked off a jury (or not selected to serve on one). It’s more effective to nullify bad laws, or unfair enforcement of the law, by simply stating that you feel reasonable doubt exists, and voting not guilty. It may make you look foolish in a case where there appears to be no reasonable doubt, but better to look a little foolish and see the cause of justice served. It can be relevant in a civil case – people may be non-criminally penalized for breaking bad laws, or for violating non-existent “rights”, just as they may face criminal penalties for these things. If the application of such penalties in a civil case is unjust, then it’s good to prevent them being inflicted on someone by nullifying (voting to acquit).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.In Reply To
lesliemangus
August 24
I think you would be foolish to mention jury nullification, even if you wanted to use it. Before I turned 70 I was on numerous juries. The judges always said that the jury must decide the case based on the law and the facts. The judge explains the law, but they always said that the jury gets to deci…
Previous RepliesStarchild
August 25
Les,I was not urging Kevin or other potential jurors to “claim jury nullification”, but rather to simply practice it. As my own experience illustrates, openly raising the topic can indeed get you kicked off a jury (or not selected to serve on one). It’s more effective to nullify bad laws, or unfair enforcement of the law, by simply stating that you feel reasonable doubt exists, and voting not guilty. It may make you look foolish in a case where there appears to be no reasonable doubt, but better to look a little foolish and see the cause of justice served. It can be relevant in a civil case – people may be non-criminally penalized for breaking bad laws, or for violating non-existent “rights”, just as they may face criminal penalties for these things. If the application of such penalties in a civil case is unjust, then it’s good to prevent them being inflicted on someone by nullifying (voting to acquit).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
lesliemangus
August 24
I think you would be foolish to mention jury nullification, even if you wanted to use it. Before I turned 70 I was on numerous juries. The judges always said that the jury must decide the case based on the law and the facts. The judge explains the law, but they always said that the jury gets to decide the facts. I never had any problem arguing for “not guilty” based on the facts. Besides that it is not clear to me what relevance jury nullification would have in a civil case, where you are mostly determining if one of the parties breached a contract or violated the other parties rights.
Even in a criminal trial you are better off finding some reasonable doubt as claiming jury nullification will most likely get you kicked off the jury. And then of course you cannot be of any help to the defendant.dennz
August 23 |
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.··· (click for more details)
dennz
August 23
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Starchild
August 23
Kevin,To rarely be selected is as a juror after being summoned is totally normal. Although I have occasionally wondered whether I was blacklisted for a while after being kicked off a jury some years ago. Supposedly it’s typical to get a summons about once a year (as I did a few weeks ago), but after the incident where I was actually empaneled and then dismissed on the second day of deliberations (for telling the other jurors about nullification), I wasn’t summoned for some years. When I eventually called the court to check on my status, I found that my name was not on the rolls for jury duty (even though I was continually registered to vote at the same address the entire time). They added me to the rolls again, and subsequently I have been called (although not chosen).
The case where I actually got on a jury was a civil case – a landlord-tenant dispute where the landlord, an older Chinese-American gentleman, was being sued for allegedly harassing the tenant and her visiting boyfriend, and causing her to have to move to a less desirable apartment. Among the allegations was that he broke the law by not providing heat in the apartment as required by city ordinance. Since there was nothing in the rental contract about heat, and the whole case seemed very flimsy to me, I did not think he should be prosecuted for that, and brought up nullification. But one of the other jurors ratted me out to the judge, and he threw me off the jury.
When I subsequently went and visited the landlord (they’d given us his address), he told me some stuff that was a real eye-opener. Apparently his lawyer discovered that the tenant had filed a change-of-address notice with the Post Office before the date of the key incident of alleged harassment, basically blowing the whole case out of the water, but the judge had not allowed that evidence to be presented in court. Nor were they allowed to raise in court the fact that the plaintiff was a serial litigant who had sued dozens of other people over the years. I was more glad than ever for having told them what they wanted to hear during voir dire* in order to get on the jury and help see justice served, and sorry only that I hadn’t been able to help more because I opened my mouth and told my fellow jurors about nullification after we entered deliberations, in the (false as it turned out) belief that once I was a juror, it was a done deal. Live and learn.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
*The process in which prospective jurors are questioned by the court and the attorneys for both sides; libertarian columnist Vin Suprynowicz has half-joked that “voir dire” is Latin for “jury tampering”.
··· (click for more details)
Devoted2022
August 23
Nice. Now I wish it was a criminal summons. I’ve never been picked ever, but I always don’t hide from it or try to get out of being picked. One day I’ll get picked I’m thinking.··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
??? I never said anything close to what your paraphrase says. MOST laws are bad laws, but the doctrine of 'jury nullification" does not prevent a jury from nullifying good laws. I never never never never said that all laws are good laws. My point is that whether a particular law is good or bad is a subjective valuation.
There is no reason to think that jury made laws will be any better than laws passed by the legislature. After all a jury could decide that chattel slavery should be allowed or that someone should be jailed on the allegation of a government official.
I did say that you should not mention “jury nullification” because that implies the jury can just make up any law they want to. You should argue that the law should not apply to the case at hand.
Starchild
September 1 |
Les,
Allow me to paraphrase your comment below to apply its logic to another topic we recently discussed, the desirability of government:
Your comments (defending the institution of government) suggest that only laws that YOU think are good will be adopted. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that legalize chattel slavery or allow you to be summarily jailed on the allegation of a government official can be passed as well. The theory of “let’s trust government to keep us safe and do our bidding” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Sound reasonable?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
Les On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 06:21:25 PM PDT, Starchild via LPSF Forum noreply@forum.lpsf.org wrote:
I know you didn’t say the doctrine of statism prevents governments from passing bad laws Les, just as I never said the doctrine of nullification prevents juries from nullifying good ones. But most laws, as you say, are bad. And the bad laws are likely to be less popular than the good ones, and thus more likely to be nullified.
On top of those odds, there is reason to think that jury-made law will be better, on average, than laws passed by the legislature, because power corrupts, and legislators have more of it than jurors do.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
On Aug 31, 2021, at 6:39 PM, Leslie Mangus via LPSF Forum wrote:
lesliemangus
September 1
??? I never said anything close to what your paraphrase says. MOST laws are bad laws, but the doctrine of 'jury nullification" does not prevent a jury from nullifying good laws. I never never never never said that all laws are good laws. My point is that whether a particular law is good or bad is a subjective valuation.
There is no reason to think that jury made laws will be any better than laws passed by the legislature. After all a jury could decide that chattel slavery should be allowed or that someone should be jailed on the allegation of a government official.I did say that you should not mention “jury nullification” because that implies the jury can just make up any law they want to. You should argue that the law should not apply to the case at hand.
Starchild
September 1 |
Les,Allow me to paraphrase your comment below to apply its logic to another topic we recently discussed, the desirability of government:
Your comments (defending the institution of government) suggest that only laws that YOU think are good will be adopted. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that legalize chattel slavery or allow you to be summarily jailed on the allegation of a government official can be passed as well. The theory of “let’s trust government to keep us safe and do our bidding” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Sound reasonable?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.In Reply To
lesliemangus
August 24
I think you would be foolish to mention jury nullification, even if you wanted to use it. Before I turned 70 I was on numerous juries. The judges always said that the jury must decide the case based on the law and the facts. The judge explains the law, but they always said that the jury gets to deci…
Previous RepliesStarchild
September 1
Les,Allow me to paraphrase your comment below to apply its logic to another topic we recently discussed, the desirability of government:
Your comments (defending the institution of government) suggest that only laws that YOU think are good will be adopted. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that legalize chattel slavery or allow you to be summarily jailed on the allegation of a government official can be passed as well. The theory of “let’s trust government to keep us safe and do our bidding” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Sound reasonable?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
lesliemangus
August 31
I have no idea what your first sentence means. I said that you are foolish to mention jury nullification.
Your comment suggests that only laws that YOU think are bad will be nullified. But every law must have seemed good to some people or it would never have been enacted. Laws that guarantee the right to own a gun or the right to free speech could be nullified as well.
The theory of “jury nullification” is surely one of the least thought out theories in all recorded history.
Les MangusStarchild
August 25 |
Les,I was not urging Kevin or other potential jurors to “claim jury nullification”, but rather to simply practice it. As my own experience illustrates, openly raising the topic can indeed get you kicked off a jury (or not selected to serve on one). It’s more effective to nullify bad laws, or unfair enforcement of the law, by simply stating that you feel reasonable doubt exists, and voting not guilty. It may make you look foolish in a case where there appears to be no reasonable doubt, but better to look a little foolish and see the cause of justice served. It can be relevant in a civil case – people may be non-criminally penalized for breaking bad laws, or for violating non-existent “rights”, just as they may face criminal penalties for these things. If the application of such penalties in a civil case is unjust, then it’s good to prevent them being inflicted on someone by nullifying (voting to acquit).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.··· (click for more details)
Starchild
August 25
Les,I was not urging Kevin or other potential jurors to “claim jury nullification”, but rather to simply practice it. As my own experience illustrates, openly raising the topic can indeed get you kicked off a jury (or not selected to serve on one). It’s more effective to nullify bad laws, or unfair enforcement of the law, by simply stating that you feel reasonable doubt exists, and voting not guilty. It may make you look foolish in a case where there appears to be no reasonable doubt, but better to look a little foolish and see the cause of justice served. It can be relevant in a civil case – people may be non-criminally penalized for breaking bad laws, or for violating non-existent “rights”, just as they may face criminal penalties for these things. If the application of such penalties in a civil case is unjust, then it’s good to prevent them being inflicted on someone by nullifying (voting to acquit).
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
lesliemangus
August 24
I think you would be foolish to mention jury nullification, even if you wanted to use it. Before I turned 70 I was on numerous juries. The judges always said that the jury must decide the case based on the law and the facts. The judge explains the law, but they always said that the jury gets to decide the facts. I never had any problem arguing for “not guilty” based on the facts. Besides that it is not clear to me what relevance jury nullification would have in a civil case, where you are mostly determining if one of the parties breached a contract or violated the other parties rights.
Even in a criminal trial you are better off finding some reasonable doubt as claiming jury nullification will most likely get you kicked off the jury. And then of course you cannot be of any help to the defendant.dennz
August 23 |
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.··· (click for more details)
dennz
August 23
It’s important….I was personally the victim of an ignorant jury. And while the judge couldn’t overturn the jury’s decision, he reduced their penalty to me from $85K to $1 saying “I just don’t get it” and that he didn’t understand their decision at all.In this case, the jury was “captive” to one guy. I’ll tell you about it privately.
Mike
··· (click for more details)
Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
Hi Noca,
Not sure anyone replied to you on this, so wanted to briefly thank you for jumping in and offering some input.
What kind of pro-freedom activism do you recommend (either specifically in terms of fully informed juries or criminal justice reform, or otherwise)? What would you be willing to do yourself? Are you local in SF? Hope to see you at an upcoming LPSF meeting!
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
Chair, Libertarian Party of San Francisco
(415) 625-FREE
On Aug 23, 2021, at 2:39 PM, Noca via LPSF Forum wrote:
Noca
August 23
I don’t want to hijack this thread too much, but I will add 2 points from my personal experience exercising this power. First, more than mislead, don’t be surprised if the judge actively denies that you have this power. And second, be careful going toe-to-toe with a judge. They can slap you with a contempt of court charge at the the drop of a hat. And though it may not stick, you probably don’t want the hassle. Don’t run your mouth. And don’t turn a 1-person rescue into a 2-person rescue.Visit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
In Reply To
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Kevin. Jury duty is important. If you’re chosen to sit on a jury, you could have the opportunity to save someone spending years behind bars for something that’s not a real crime, and send police and prosecutors a message that they are wasting their time to arrest and persecute people for vic…
Previous RepliesDevoted2022
August 23
I’ll check that out. It’s just a civil summons, but I always make sure I go if I’m summoned. I never get chosen though. Maybe this time.··· (click for more details)
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Kevin. Jury duty is important. If you’re chosen to sit on a jury, you could have the opportunity to save someone spending years behind bars for something that’s not a real crime, and send police and prosecutors a message that they are wasting their time to arrest and persecute people for victimless “crimes” like drug use, prostitution, weapons possession, tax evasion, etc.So I wouldn’t encourage you to skip out on a jury summons to join us, but if you aren’t called, I hope to see you there!
However I do urge you or anyone else who’s unfamiliar with jury nullification/juror rights to check out FIJA.org (the Fully Informed Jury Association) and learn about how you do NOT have to blindly follow judges’ instructions, but rather you can vote to acquit not only when there is reasonable doubt that a defendant broke the law, but also when it is a bad law, or it is being unfairly enforced. You can do this by simply maintaining, to other jurors and to the court, that you believe there is reasonable doubt, and then vote “Not Guilty”. If you do not go any further in explaining your reasoning, there is nothing those in power can do about it.
Historically, this has been an important protection the people have against the enforcement of bad laws. It was used to fight against the return of runaway slaves and other legal abuses. But most judges not only won’t tell you about this power, they will try to mislead you into thinking that you do not have it, and that you must follow the law strictly as they explain it to you.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
Devoted2022
August 23
I was thinking of going. I’m on call for jury duty this week. If I don’t have to report I wanted to go. Would be cool to see you guys.Kevin
··· (click for more details)
Starchild
August 23
Thanks, Mike. I created a Meetup for this demonstration:Meetup
Health & Freedom Rally: Support Federal/State/City Employees Against…
Fri, Aug 27, 2021, 12:00 PM: Government employees typically have a lot to answer for. They are often involved with carrying out and enforcing the tyrannical laws and policies, and imposing the burdens
Who else is planning on going? I was at an event in the Mission today where people made signs…
There’s also a protest at the Golden Gate Bridge Welcome Center (I believe at the SF end of the bridge) from noon-2pm on Sunday, August 29. Anyone going to that one? If you’re driving, I could use a ride.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
··· (click for more details)
dennz
August 23
Be ThereMichael Denny
Live and Let Live www.LiveandLetLive.orghttp://www.LiveandLetLive.org
Libertarian Party of San Francisco www.LPSF.orghttp://www.LPSF.org
No On Prop A www.badsfbonds.blogspot.comhttp://www.badsfbonds.blogspot.com
www.DennyForMayor.comhttp://www.dennyformayor.com/
(415) 608-0269
mike@Dennz.commailto:mike@Dennz.comVisit Topic or reply to this email to respond.
You are receiving this because you enabled mailing list mode.
To unsubscribe from these emails, click here.
If you were forwarded this email and want to subscribe, click here.
