The Power of One

Jury Nullification may be the final peaceful barrier between law-abiding gun owners and a tyrannical government dependent upon disarming honorable citizens.

For jury nullification to protect gun ownership rights, and all constitutional rights of gun owners, it is necessary for jurors to learn about their authority to judge the law and its application.

The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) has prepared a brochure helping us to defend our right to keep and bear arms in the courtroom. If you're not familiar with this group and the historical basis for their arguments, or even if you are, go to their website for in depth information, updates on current efforts, and more.

Per Iloilo Marguerite Jones, Executive Director:

Larry Pratt distributed these brochures to his membership when they first came out, and Liberty Belles, many other gun groups and a few Constitutional groups have distributed them as well. We are happy to send this brochure, which is included in our information packet, to anyone who requests information. Call to our 1-800-TEL-JURY information line to request an information packet, which will be mailed to anyone who calls.

Go here to download the brochure (Adobe Reader required). Or, you can go to their website and order various quantities, as well as other informative FIJA materials.

I just realized I hadn't added them to my blogroll, so that oversight has been corrected. I invite fellow gunbloggers to add them to their links as well.

And I'm sure any and all support will be welcomed.

On Nullification

Robert Levy has a NYT op-ed. [More]

Here's the thing about nullification. My friend Russ Howard responded to an article I wrote last month by sending me this observation:

As ______________  recently pointed out to me, our side should stop using "nullified", nullify, nullification, etc, which is clearly a loser with the public, and start using phrases like "fair trial", "righting wrongs", acquitting, clearing, honoring the oath, obeying the highest law of the land, law enforcement, etc. E.g., "Jury Nullification" is a loser. "Fair Trial", use of discretion to right injustice, etc, are winners.

The Sheriff did not "nullify the law". The arrest / prosecution / statutory law would've nullified the Constitution. He obeyed and honored the highest law of the land, and prevented a lesser law or act from nullifying it. He did his job and obeyed The Law. Anything contrary isn't law and doesn't need to be "nullified". He was even preventing illegal activity, ending an illegal arrest, which is his job. Law enforcement.

Of course some would tell us that's not our place to decide -- and that if the composition of the Supreme Court can change enough to shift just one vote, well, turn 'em all in, Mr. and Mrs. America...

Guerilla Jurors

Citizens in our (once) free republic founded under the English common law system, have both the power and the right to vote according to conscience when they sit on a jury and can vote not guilty even in the face of the law and in the face of the evidence. The defendant also has a right to expect that his jury will be fully informed of their rightful power to vote “not guilty” if they believe justice requires it, regardless of the evidence. Anything less is not a real jury trial. [More]

I've been ordered to appear for jury duty in July.  It'll be interesting to see how far I can go in explaining my position to the judge without getting a contempt citation.

Unfortunately, I have a public enough record on jury nullification that I can't just keep quiet about it if asked a direct question.

This Day in History: September 5

Jury Rights Day September 5, 2008

Friday marks the 338th anniversary of when jurors refused to convict William Penn of violating England's Conventicle Acts, despite clear evidence that he acted illegally by preaching a Quaker sermon. In refusing to convict Penn, the jurors ignored what they knew to be an unjust law. This is known as jury nullification.

End the War on Freedom reminds us of an important date in the history of our quest for Liberty. For more information, visit the Fully Informed Jury Association.

Also, Vin Suprynowicz shares his thoughts.

Null and Void

That concept, called jury nullification, is highly controversial, and courts are hostile to it. But federal prosecutors have now taken the unusual step of having Mr. Heicklen indicted on a charge that his distributing of such pamphlets at the courthouse entrance violates the law against jury tampering. He is to appear in court on Friday for a conference in his case. [More]

Here's to the day when his persecutors will enjoy the benefits of a fully informed jury at their trial.

Lest Ye Be Judged

A Michigan man is charged with a felony for obstruction of justice and misdemeanor of tampering with a jury for passing out fliers about jury nullification rights on the sidewalk of the Mecosta County courthouse. [More]

Remember this tyrant.

[Via bondmen]

A Fully Uninformed Jury

Jury finds man guilty of jury tampering after passing out juror rights pamphlets [More]

Slaves judged a runaway.

One thing FIJA has not been successful at is getting the message outside the niche and into the general public consciousness. That's due to many reasons, most having to do with the establishment suppressing information via both the educational system and through the media.

I've long thought one way to help break through that would be to pick a state that has ballot measures and create one instructing jurors have a right to be told their nullification powers as part of the instructions.

It probably wouldn't pass, but it would sure get more people aware of the concept, and woudln't have to be prohibitively expensive.

[Via Florida Guy]   

On This We Can Agree

California Passes Law Allowing Citizens to Refuse to Help Police Officers [More]

Good.

I see many law-and-order types having apoplexy over this, and at the risk of being condemned as a contrarian (or worse), they are not thinking this through.

Haven't we seen enough evidence to stop buying into the special "Only Ones" privileges and immunities lie?

I will decide who I will help, and when and under what circumstances. Perhaps I saw the lead-up to confrontation and believe it was started with inappropriate aggressiveness. Perhaps I will exercise my right to not be complicit in enforcing an edict I disagree with (like arresting an "I will not comply" patriot.) Think of it as pre-jury nullification. Perhaps in order to help, I will have to reveal my own noncompliance with a diktat (like maybe having a defense weapon on my person in "May Not Issue" CA.)

Perhaps if you want my help, you ought to act like you deserve it.

Perhaps I don't choose to offer anyone an explanation beyond BFYTW.

[Via several of you]

ADDENDUM: Now if they want to activate the citizen militia and afford all proper considerations for uninfringed RKBA, we can start talking terms.

Speaking of Jury Nullification...

“I’m not altogether happy to have to make this decision on behalf of the defendant,” Rakoff said as jurors continued deliberating the case. [More]

A Clinton nominee, of course...

The First Branch

Elias Alias explores jury nullification. [More]

This is a long one, so you may want to either set aside the requisite half hour or so, depending on how fast you read, or bookmark it so you can break it into bite-sized chunks.

Sorry, but to paraphrase Euclid, there is no royal road to Justice.

We're the Only Ones Helpful Enough

A judge has declared a mistrial in the case of a Mississippi mayor charged with leading a sledgehammer attack on a duplex he suspected was a crack house...Melton...said he was only trying to help the city and the tenant. [More]

An "Only One" and a "Mayor Against Guns."

Dare we hope jury nullification reaches any lower...?

[Via Stephen S]

We're the Only Ones Nullifying Enough

Federal Judge Advocates Jury Nullification After Being Shocked by Overzealous Child Pornography Prosecution [More]

So when they do it, it's OK, but when we do it, it's not?

[Via Michael G]

A Good First Step

New Hampshire Adopts Jury Nullification Law [More]

We'll see how far judges let the boundaries get tested...

[Via Jeet]

Crime Gun Solutions--Who These Guys ARE

The names of the chief operators are: Joseph J. Vince Jr., Partner, Gerald A. Nunziato, Partner, Ronald Schuman, Partner, and Robert A. Ricker, Senior Executive Consultant. "Crime Gun Solutions LLC (CGS) partners include the former Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms (BATF) Special Agent In Charge of the National Tracing Center, the former Chief of the BATF Headquarters Firearm Enforcement Division and the Crime Gun Analysis Branch, and the former BATF Criminal Enforcement Information Systems Development Program Manager." Yep. BATFU careerists. "CGS has worked with city law departments, State Attorney Generals’ Offices, major police departments, and private law firms in an effort to assist them in acquiring, analyzing, and utilizing crime-gun information." So they're paid either by anti-gun politicians using money taxed from We the People, or by law firms suing gun makers? "CGS has been praised for their work in educating judges and juries on the various aspects of using crime-gun information." Yeah, "praised" by enemies of the Second Amendment. And ain't it ironic--no one is "educating judges and juries on various aspects of" the Constitution, the intent of the Framers, the Second Amendment, jury nullification... I question the use of the photo of what looks like a dead guy on their home page--this looks like a real crime scene photo. Is it, and if so, who authorized its use in a for-profit venture? I also find it very interesting that our old pal Robert Ricker is entrenched in the core of this cabal. He was named CCRKBA's "Gun Rights Defender of the Month" back in February of 1999 [they have since removed this from their site, but it is preserved via The Wayback Machine. Bad move deleting it, Alan--our side shouldn't be the ones erasing history; you could have explained it by just admitting you were betrayed along with everyone else.] "Just last month, for instance, in a major article on the growing number of lawsuits filed against firearms companies by big-city anti-gun politicians, The Washington Post reported that 'Bob Ricker of the American Shooting Sports Council, a trade association for gunmakers, vowed that his members won’t be intimidated into an out-of-court settlement, regardless of how many cities line up against them. "Ricker also said the swarm of tobacco plaintiffs’ lawyers suggests that the suits against the industry are frivolous, the work of an opportunistic gang of legal predators. "‘We’ll be able to show that what these lawyers are actually after is money,’ he said, a contention certain to become part of the gun manufacturers’ defense." Now Robert Ricker is a leading voice FOR suing gun makers: "Robert A. Ricker, former Assistant General Counsel for the National Rifle Association and former Executive Director of the American Shooting Sports Council, was scheduled to testify today in the NAACP's landmark lawsuit against the gun industry. "Ricker recently revealed that the gun industry has long known its practices aid criminal access to guns yet has done nothing about it. According to a declaration he filed in another case, 'many manufacturers and distributors consistently refuse to address the problem of the 'felons among us.' They instead hide behind the fiction that as long as a retail dealer has a valid federal firearms license to sell guns, no attention to the dealer's business practices is required by its suppliers.'" So was Robert Ricker lying then or is he lying now? How can we tell? And why would anyone give testimony from this Judas any credibility at all? [Thanks to correspondent Bob Lewis for tracking down the CGS website!]

Null and Void

Unlike Judge Weinstein, I have reflexively incorporated into my jury instructions what can only be viewed as an anti-nullification charge: “You should not be concerned about the wisdom of any rule I state. Regardless of any opinion that you may have as to what the law may be or ought to be, it would violate your sworn duty to base a verdict on any view of the law other than that which I give you.” [More]

And then he goes on to tell us that doesn't work. Typical. But not surprising from the Brady talking points he cites.

Screw him. Vote your conscience and nullify the influence of judicial tyrants.

If it doesn't help secure the Blessings of Liberty, the hell with what these arrogant authoritarians say. Besides, they routinely break a more solemn oath every time they put on the black robe...

And yeah, I realize this is a year old. Unfortunately, as long as it is still "relevant," it will remain a timely reference.

[Via cycjec]

Clinton Appointee Judicial Ethics

Jurors in Sarah Palin’s Defamation Suit Against New York Times Knew Judge Planned to Dismiss Her Claims [More]

So add jury tampering to bench nullification?

Will the robed saboteur be punished, starting with impeachment, disbarment, and denial of rights under color of authority?