Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Case Dismissed Against Jury Nullification Advocate

Posted 6 years ago on April 19, 2012, 5:21 p.m. EST by darrenlobo (204)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

A federal judge ordered the dismissal on Thursday of an indictment against a retired chemistry professor who had been charged with jury tampering for advocating the controversial position known as jury nullification while standing on a plaza outside the United States Courthouse in Manhattan.


Keep jury nullification in mind, it may save your bacon someday!



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by MachineShopHippie (216) from Louisville, KY 6 years ago

Oh, yes. I have been waiting for this day. Advocating jury nullification is officially free speech! Now it is officially protected by this ruling!

Go forth, my fellow Occupiers! Spread the word!

People forget that the ultimate law enforcement authority is a jury of your peers.

Don't want a bunch of non-violent drug offenders in jail? Just don't send them there.

Don't think some kid should go away for 20 years for vandalism because of an overreaching prosecution and a hanging judge? Just vote not guilty.

This whole nonsense of 'making an example' of youthful offenders by piling on charges and enhancements and going for maximum time is meant to force jurors to cooperate in the prosecutor's lynching attempt. If the punishment doesn't fit the crime, don't just hope they get out early or that the judge gives them a lighter sentence. Refuse to participate in this mockery of our justice system.

Not Guilty - Free people choosing not to take away the freedom of others.

[-] 3 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

I agree with this completely. If selected for a jury, vote your conscience, and to hell with the letter of the law! But don't eschew the process, we need the jury system itself.


[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 6 years ago

No, we don't want trial by jury, we'll go for military fireing squad.

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 6 years ago


As an aside, if you ever want to get out of jury duty and you are being questioned by the attorneys just say you believe in jury nullification. You'll be sent home in a second and will educate the other prospective jurors (you probably won't be picked anyway, they like the manipulable).

[-] 2 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

Yes, when they called me I told them on the online questionnaire that I'm a FIJA activist & advocate of jury nullification. I can't imagine why they said never mind.

[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 6 years ago

Is FIJA planning any activities in NYC in celebration of Heicklen's victory? I went over to http://fija.org/ but didn't see any activities.

The prosecutors were out of control to think they had a case. Pure arrogance.

[-] 2 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

"On Monday, April 23, 2012, I will be distributing jury nullification literature on the plaza in front of the U. S. Federal Courthouse at 500 Pearl Street, Manhattan, NY 10007, from 12:00 noon to 1:00 pm. You all are invited to join me. At 1:30 pm there will be a victory luncheon for everyone who wishes to attend at their own expense at one of the best Chinese restaurants in near-by China Town. Please send me your suggestion for which restaurant you prefer."


[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 6 years ago

Damn, just got the message (TU, the 24th). But thanks.

The drug laws are insane. Kids who are illegally and unconstitutionally "stopped and frisked" are often then tried on minor infractions and actually sent to prison. Jury nullification is the answer. The citizens are moral, the power players not.

Actually there's nothing 'controversial' about it, it's the right of any jury member. Jurors should know that they are the law.

[+] -5 points by fleaparty (-18) 6 years ago

Cool, but can we let the criminals loose in YOUR neighborhood and not mine? Yeah, that would be great. Fight the power! LOL.

[-] 3 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

Come on fleaparty, that's not what jury nullification is about. It's about stopping the govt from being able to convict people of oppressive laws.


[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 6 years ago

So everyone arrested is guilty as charged?

So it's fine with you to destroy/blight young people's lives for marijuana possession or for carrying a thumb opening knife you can buy in any Lowes or Home Depot (as happens in NY stop and frisk cases)?

If your answer to both is yes then you are a monster, perhaps a sociopath. It's time to call you anti-American anti-freedom freaks out.


[-] 1 points by JoeW (109) 5 years ago

I can't wait to see 13-0 aquitals for possession/paraphernalia charges. Also, when filling out jury forms, always show that you are as unbiased as possible. Improve your chance of being selected for jury duty so you can have a greater say in the political process.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 years ago

I am against the death penalty

[-] 1 points by JoeW (109) 5 years ago

You would have to weigh your conscience against the safety of society at large in your verdict in that case, or you could refuse to come to a decision.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 5 years ago

no sir

I will not serve on a jury that seeks the death penalty

[-] 1 points by JoeW (109) 5 years ago

Also your right, I would just rather make my voice a little louder from the height of those comfy juror seats.

[-] 1 points by forourfutures (393) 6 years ago

Excellent info! And a very important aspect that must be at the root of part of what Lincoln said.

"We, the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow men who pervert the Constitution."

Abraham Lincoln

Article V is your first constitutional right. The right to "alter or abolish" abusive government, from the Declaration of Independence. It is codified in Article V of the US constitution.

**Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.**

To prevent hijacking, and preserve constitutional intent, preparatory amendment is assumed as vital by citizens to return the nation to a degree of democratically enabled constitutionality.

This post in the Article V forum is what sold me on a fairly simple concept and strategy for executing Article V,


describes how hijacking is prevented and complete control over the federal government by the states is attained by ending the abridging of free speech. A tyrue lawful and peaceful revolution.

We are 100 years late. Congress is afraid of it for a reason.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 6 years ago

So good thing or bad thing

[-] -3 points by MikeInOhio (13) 6 years ago

What a wooooonderful goal! Hurray, we can all live in a lawless society where magic keeps us safe, and tree sprites provide our sustenance. And no one will have to work, and the government will send us an endless supply of money. Yeah!

That's really great, Darren. You're going places in life.

[-] 3 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

You should go back to school & learn how to read. Where have I ever advocated any of the nonsense you just mentioned?

[+] -4 points by MikeInOhio (13) 6 years ago

I should go back to school. I need to figure out why all you OWSters are so darn ingnorant.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 6 years ago

Perhaps you don't realize I'm the token libertarian around here. What you say applies to the socialists.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

Yep. And you are a rare and truly principled Libertarian probably with a true feel for Adam Smith's 'Wealth of Nations' (1776!). We'll hasty skip over the 'Revisionist Amoral Nigglingly Disconcerting' - Objectivism, which I'd suggest is actually Highly Subjective !!! ~;-)

Nevertheless, I wanted to express my appreciation for this extremely interesting thread and its subject matter about which I previously knew little. Thanx :-)

I really wouldn't mind being reminded about your excellent and informative blog too actually - and not just because I want to hone my rejoinders, lol.

'commune bonnum' est 'summum bonnum' !!!

[-] -3 points by MikeInOhio (13) 6 years ago

No self-respecting Libertarian would advocate nullification. You then have mob rule. Just take a look at the Travon case,

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

half in

but doesn't nullification just prevent stuff from happening

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Narcissism isn't self respect. It's a disease.

Therefore there are NO self respecting libe(R)tarians.

That check ain't never gonna clear at this rate.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 6 years ago

would be a hard on to deny of the peoples vote was none and verifiable

[-] -3 points by MikeInOhio (13) 5 years ago

Yes, justice. Take a look at some of the other legal systems around the world.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 5 years ago

Zimmerman hasn't been before a jury yet. Anyway, look history. Nullification was used to negate the run away slave laws & prohibition.

[-] -1 points by MikeInOhio (13) 5 years ago

Why have a legal system then? Does mob rule sound better?

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 5 years ago

The courts have essentially become the govt's prosecution machine. In that sense we have "mob" rule, the govt gang gets away with just about anything it wants to.

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law,' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

                                                                             Thomas Jefferson 

How do you propose to check the govt's abuse of power? The mob rule argument is a red herring. No one is talking about nullifying in murder or real crime cases.

[-] -1 points by MikeInOhio (13) 5 years ago

It seems to have worked quite well for 225 years., darren. We all seemed to get along fine before you came along.

[-] 1 points by darrenlobo (204) 5 years ago

I'm sure the millions of prisoners in US prisons would disagree. Long live the prison industrial complex!