TexasCHLforum.com

tommyg wrote:Anyone who flames me for this statement is a nieve fool

Well then...thread over.

tommyg wrote: Anyone with any legal training is automatically culled out of being a juror

They also don't want felons who have had expierence with the law that is
why felons are ban from jury duty no jail house lawyers allowed on a jury.

Anyone who flames me for this statement is a nieve fool

I used to think attorneys were always bumped, but one time (jury duty summons) during voir dire one of the potential jurors mentioned that he was a former prosecutor. I was surprised he made it to voir dire, but even more surprised that he was selected to serve on the jury. The defense attorney didn't scratch him either.

Regarding nullification, it only works if you have suffient jurors to sway the decision. Otherwise, you'd just continue to deliberate or end up w/ a hung jury.

tommyg wrote:Anyone who flames me for this statement is a nieve fool

They're a foolish fist?

nieve
noun
Archaic Northern British and Scot. Dialect . a clenched or closed hand; fist.

...if it's spelled wrong, have we really been called a name...or not

speedsix wrote:...if it's spelled wrong, have we really been called a name...or not

If a husband states an opinion in the forest, without his wife around, is he still automatically wrong? :-)

SIA

WildBill wrote:

C-dub wrote:Ah, found it!

Judgement Notwithstanding Verdict (JNOV)

It can be a little tricky, but that's what I was thinking about.

This is very rare. A judge can also issue a directed [not quilty] verdict before the case goes to the jury. Also very rare.

Strangely enough I have been on a jury that had a directed verdict.

I have used JURY NULLICFICATION in EL Paso.
I was on a Jury that was dismissed and the Judge was irritated. He stated the whole Jury Pool for the trail was poisoned and sent us all home.
In fact that was years ago and have never been back to the court since. So I guess when you let the Judge know that your aware of rights that
years ago would have been part of the instructions to a Jury they don't like it. I hate it when I see Juries say we wanted to free the man since
we understood what he did. But the Judge said in his instructions that we had to follow what the Judge said.
This right like many American rights is quickly disappearing I suspect in the near future we may not have Jury trails any more since the state
does not really like free thinking free Americans. Just remember you have to let the Judge drag this out of you or he may find you guilty of
contempt. The draw back at least in practice is that you will never be on a jury again in the state of Texas.

I've never been on a jury (only got two summons, but was in college at the time). Supposedly the judge can choose what evidence is allowed and what is not. So right there, the judge can greatly affect what is perceived by the jury.

Remember,
"This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice."
~ Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1902 to 1932)

OldCannon wrote:

pbwalker wrote:Mentioning Jury Nullification is the *quickest* way out of Jury Duty...

ANY sign of cognitive thinking is the quickest way out of jury duty.

And that's why very few of us on this forum get past voir dire and onto a jury.
I sat on 3 juries, none of them after I turned 30.

I'm very familiar with jury nullification.
If I were on a jury it would be an option.