You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
It didn't go to court, so technically no. They indirectly ask you if you would use jury nullification ("would you have moral objections to convicting if the evidence conclusively proved guilt," or something like that). If you know what jury nullification is, and would use it in that instance, you'd have to say so at that point.
Apparently though, no one said they'd convict someone for possessing cannabis in this case, so the judge was unable to even have ("seat") a jury, and no jury apparently means no trial.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] FPSFairy 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
It didn't go to court, so technically no. They indirectly ask you if you would use jury nullification ("would you have moral objections to convicting if the evidence conclusively proved guilt," or something like that). If you know what jury nullification is, and would use it in that instance, you'd have to say so at that point.
Apparently though, no one said they'd convict someone for possessing cannabis in this case, so the judge was unable to even have ("seat") a jury, and no jury apparently means no trial.
[–] AverageAmerica ago
"justice" system.
Absolutely no respect for that shit hole, they can't even play by their own rules.