PaxNova t1_isbkzd6 wrote
Reply to comment by barrinmw in Parkland prosecutors ask for an investigation after a juror says she was threatened by ‘a fellow juror’ during deliberations - CNN by SilentR0b
Jurors are finders of fact, not determiners of law. That "sometimes" does a lot of work there, as most states and the federal government do not allow juries to determine sentencing.
A jury may be the last line against tyranny, but for a criminal trial, they also almost always have to be unanimous. That means if a single person out of twelve disagrees with the law, nobody can be convicted of it. That would cover pretty much all laws.
AmHoomon t1_iscmkc7 wrote
> Jurors are finders of fact, not determiners of law.
Here's an exercise:
Where, in what law, binds jurors as you describe?
PaxNova t1_iscp7aw wrote
Definitions will vary in statute by state, but Wex defines then as finders of fact. The definition will be used in statute.
There is difficulty in holding them to it, as you cannot dispute the facts once they are found by the jury except on certain circumstances, but the intent / spirit of the law is clear.
barrinmw t1_isbmmlb wrote
Looking it up, in death penalty cases it looks like jurors always get to determine if it is applicable and it always has to be unanimous regardless of state or federal.
ithriosa t1_iscxsgt wrote
No one is saying that jurors have no choice...
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments