A jury's decision should be based on...

Created by GlitterSucks on Jul 16, 2013

23 votes

Click on an option to vote

Emotion

Law

Topix opinion

Political correctness to cease the violence

“Where did I put my tiara?”

Since: Dec 11

Columbus, OH

#1 Jul 16, 2013
So tired of armchair emotionalists. Are some people wrongully convicted? Yep. Are some people that I feel should be incarcerated free? Yep.

I'm tired of the media fueling emotion and not focusing on the law of the land.
Geezy Pete

Columbus, OH

#2 Jul 16, 2013
GlitterSucks wrote:
So tired of armchair emotionalists. Are some people wrongully convicted? Yep. Are some people that I feel should be incarcerated free? Yep.
I'm tired of the media fueling emotion and not focusing on the law of the land.
Can you possibly get any stupider? I am sure you can. Does capitalism mean that private companies can present whatever news they want in the manner they want? Seems like the American way! Are citizens required to read or watch any particular brand of news, or any news at all? Believe it or not, no. Any more questions? Yes, armchair emotionalists. What is up with that? I know, funny stuff!
just saying

Reynoldsburg, OH

#3 Jul 16, 2013
Geezy Pete wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you possibly get any stupider? I am sure you can. Does capitalism mean that private companies can present whatever news they want in the manner they want? Seems like the American way! Are citizens required to read or watch any particular brand of news, or any news at all? Believe it or not, no. Any more questions? Yes, armchair emotionalists. What is up with that? I know, funny stuff!
Just give her a clueless, nuts and off topic and move on.

She's a bit mental.

You know, tetched.
hey now

Columbus, OH

#4 Jul 16, 2013
Need to add "A white jury vote of jury nullification" Blacks on juries nullify white man's laws all the time and give their co-stains a walk.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#5 Jul 16, 2013
Whatever they want.
Jonah Gumby

Dayton, OH

#6 Jul 20, 2013
There are so many unconstitutional laws in effect, it takes a thinking persons breath away.

Everyone on a jury should consider both the legality of laws in effect and the normal assessment of evidence.

A jury trial is the opportunity to be judged by ones peers, not the corrupt legal establishment.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#7 Jul 20, 2013
Evidence. That is what a jury is to weigh and base a decision upon. No one in a jury is necessarily a lawyer. They are instructed on what to base their decisions on. Doesn't necessarily mean any within the jury will agree, either. And to Jonah, don't forget that being on trial in front of a jury deemed to be your peers is part of our legal establishment. That last sentence had to be one of the stupidest I've read in a long time. It's a group of impartial citizens from your jurisdiction. Nothing more, nothing less. Doesn't make the legal system corrupt.
Jonah Gumby

Dayton, OH

#8 Jul 20, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
Evidence. That is what a jury is to weigh and base a decision upon. No one in a jury is necessarily a lawyer. They are instructed on what to base their decisions on. Doesn't necessarily mean any within the jury will agree, either. And to Jonah, don't forget that being on trial in front of a jury deemed to be your peers is part of our legal establishment. That last sentence had to be one of the stupidest I've read in a long time. It's a group of impartial citizens from your jurisdiction. Nothing more, nothing less. Doesn't make the legal system corrupt.
It is very apparent you don't understand the reality of illegal laws or the political misapplication of legal laws.

Being judged by a jury of your peers is enshrined in the US constitution:

Amendment 6

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

Amendment 7

In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

A judge is in a court only to instruct the jury of the law, and to keep order, not to make a decision of guilt or innocence. A jury has the power to ajudicate the law and the evidence.

Cure your extreme ignorance, retard.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#9 Jul 20, 2013
Jonah Gumby wrote:
<quoted text>
It is very apparent you don't understand the reality of illegal laws or the political misapplication of legal laws.
Being judged by a jury of your peers is enshrined in the US constitution:
Amendment 6
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
Amendment 7
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
A judge is in a court only to instruct the jury of the law, and to keep order, not to make a decision of guilt or innocence. A jury has the power to ajudicate the law and the evidence.
Cure your extreme ignorance, retard.
Read for comprehension, write to reflect understanding. It was you who wrote this:

A jury trial is the opportunity to be judged by ones peers, not the corrupt legal establishment

I commented on the idiocy of that statement. The legal system does, in fact, rely on a jury of peers. A good suggestion would be to understand how a jury of peers is defined--as a group of impartial citizens who are members of one's community. Their purpose is to weigh the evidence of a case, nothing else.

Reflect.
Jonah Gumby

Dayton, OH

#10 Jul 20, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
Read for comprehension, write to reflect understanding. It was you who wrote this:
A jury trial is the opportunity to be judged by ones peers, not the corrupt legal establishment
I commented on the idiocy of that statement. The legal system does, in fact, rely on a jury of peers. A good suggestion would be to understand how a jury of peers is defined--as a group of impartial citizens who are members of one's community. Their purpose is to weigh the evidence of a case, nothing else.
Reflect.
Repeating what you've already believe is true does not somehow make it true, retard.

ABA scum have dummies like you believing a jury is somehow restricted in what they can adjudicate. The ABA's got you believing that only a judge can adjudicate law and evidence, when in fact the US constitution says only a jury has this power exclusively.

A jury is empowered to decide guilt or innocence based on any criteria they judge appropriate, because the US constitution levys no restriction on the latitude of a jury of peers.

Tell the truth here shyster; you're ABA union scum.

“Queen of my domain”

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#11 Jul 20, 2013
Jonah Gumby wrote:
<quoted text>

Tell the truth here shyster; you're ABA union scum.
LMAO, NO. Those who know me, and a number of folks on the Columbus forum, do know me personally, would laugh at such an accusation. I simply alleged that your assessment of the legal system as corrupt is false, even though you want a jury of peers and our system already allows for that.
Jonah Gumby

Dayton, OH

#12 Jul 20, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO, NO. Those who know me, and a number of folks on the Columbus forum, do know me personally, would laugh at such an accusation. I simply alleged that your assessment of the legal system as corrupt is false, even though you want a jury of peers and our system already allows for that.
The establisment legal system and you claim that a jury cannot judge the law and the evidence; only the evidence can be judged by a jury according to you.

I've shown here that you and the legal establishment are wrong and that the US constitution contradicts your claim. A jury is fully empowered to judge based on evidence and law.

Reflect on that truth, shyster.
Jonah Gumby

Dayton, OH

#13 Jul 20, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
<quoted text>
LMAO, NO. Those who know me, and a number of folks on the Columbus forum, do know me personally, would laugh at such an accusation. I simply alleged that your assessment of the legal system as corrupt is false, even though you want a jury of peers and our system already allows for that.
A jury that is only allowed to consider evidence when deciding guilt or innocence is not really an empowered judge.

A real judge can consider both the evidence and the legality or misapplication (prosecution) of law.

The establishment legal system currently denies juries the power to consider the legality or misapplication of laws.

Reflect on that fact, retard.
Jonah Dummy

Galloway, OH

#14 Jul 20, 2013
A judge is not a jury. Yes, I am a retard.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#15 Jul 20, 2013
Jonah Gumby wrote:
<quoted text>
A jury that is only allowed to consider evidence when deciding guilt or innocence is not really an empowered judge.
A real judge can consider both the evidence and the legality or misapplication (prosecution) of law.
The establishment legal system currently denies juries the power to consider the legality or misapplication of laws.
Reflect on that fact, retard.
You really have no idea what you are talking about.

In a jury trial, the judge as as a gatekeeper, keeping out evidence that is either irrelevant, or more prejudicial than probative, makes sure that the rules of criminal procedure are applied appropriately, and assists in instructing the jury on the law.

The jury's role is to apply the law to the evidence admitted on the record, and issue a verdict. The jury is free to engage in nullification if it feels that applying the law to the evidence would result in an injustice to the defendant.

In a bench trial, the Judge serves both roles.

Depending on the facts of a particular case, a bench trial may sometimes be more advantageous for a defendant. Its rare, but it certainly does occur, especially when the defendant is extremely unpopular publicly and there are good legal grounds that might support a not guilty verdict which a jury might simply ignore, merely because of their distaste for the defendant.

woof

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#16 Jul 20, 2013
gokeefe wrote:
Evidence. That is what a jury is to weigh and base a decision upon. No one in a jury is necessarily a lawyer. They are instructed on what to base their decisions on. Doesn't necessarily mean any within the jury will agree, either. And to Jonah, don't forget that being on trial in front of a jury deemed to be your peers is part of our legal establishment. That last sentence had to be one of the stupidest I've read in a long time. It's a group of impartial citizens from your jurisdiction. Nothing more, nothing less. Doesn't make the legal system corrupt.
II don't think he was pointing out corruption, just that sometimes the law is on trial too. That's why, for example, you occasionally hear about "jury nullification", which, despite possible jury instruction to the contrary, is a perfectly legitimate concept.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
COPS lives MATTER 5 min Duke for Mayor 169
The Middle East 18 min They cannot kill ... 47
African American Male Initiative seeks to help ... 36 min zombie prepper 7
Merry Christmas everybody 1 hr Duke for Mayor 35
Joe Cocker is dead. 1 hr Duke for Mayor 61
Who do you side with in New York and why? 1 hr d pantz 14
Black on black and scarcely a peep. 1 hr d pantz 3
Is Barack Obama Doing a Good Job as President? (Aug '13) 8 hr Pale Rider 4,922
2 magical days until Christmas 8 hr Jack N Hoff 68
Columbus Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Columbus News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Columbus

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:46 pm PST

NBC Sports 1:46PM
Mike Pettine: Our first-round picks aren't busts
Bleacher Report 2:15 AM
Should New England Patriots Rest Key Starters in Week 17?
NBC Sports 6:16 AM
A.J. Green's injured arm "feeling a little better"
NFL 7:11 AM
Mike Pettine: Browns won't write off Manziel, Gilbert
Bleacher Report10:17 AM
Complete Week 17 Preview for Baltimore