- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A curious legal quirk could see Luigi Mangione walk free
Posted on 8/3/26 at 1:54 pm to Indefatigable
Posted on 8/3/26 at 1:54 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
ETA: Also, this isn't a "legal quirk" There's nothing legal about it. Its illegal, in fact.
Not sure what you mean. Absolutely nothing illegal about finding a person not guilty when you don't agree with the law. However It IS illegal to lie during the jury selection process in order to get on the jury so you can nullify the jury. Judges will instruct the jury to apply the law as it is written but nobody is legally compelled to arrive at a verdict based strictly on the law. The final arbiter of guilt is the jury and they can use whatever criteria they want (other than being bribed).
1
Posted on 8/3/26 at 1:58 pm to djmed
There is very little chance this gets used. Jury nullification is available in every legal case in our land and when is the last high profile case we've heard of it being used? None that I recall.
If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 2:01 pm to TBoy
quote:
This dude was always going to walk Scott free. He’s a hero to the left because he killed a healthcare CEO.
He murdered someone who made money promoting vaccine poison.
(Is that how it’s done?)
Is it?
Using that logic I would be very paranoid if I was any of number of Gaslight Media News hacks or Big Pharma doctors and scientists who were on national television every night for 2-3 years speaking outright lies about Covid-19......and still fricking lying. Fauci's pardon and subsequent silence really says it all.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 2:12 pm to djmed
Maybe some Health care CEO will shoot him in the head
Posted on 8/3/26 at 2:23 pm to djmed
Did anyone else not see this coming?
Posted on 8/3/26 at 2:24 pm to SCLibertarian
Hung them all, defendant, jury and judge. Don’t leave anything to chance
Posted on 8/3/26 at 2:26 pm to djmed
Oh good lord.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 2:26 pm to djmed
That’s not a legal loophole. That’s jurors violating their oath.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 3:01 pm to djmed
quote:
The December 4 Legal Committee, which has raised more than $1.5 million for Mangione’s defense fund, is raising awareness about jury nullification,
They just might end up guilty of Jury Tampering. How are they going to introduce this idea to Court Proceedings?
This post was edited on 8/3/26 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 8/3/26 at 3:33 pm to tadman
It’s been used multiple times in the DC circuit by the Marxists since Trump got back in office
Posted on 8/3/26 at 4:51 pm to PeleofAnalytics
quote:
Not sure what you mean. Absolutely nothing illegal about finding a person not guilty when you don't agree with the law.
Yes, there is. One of the essential obligations of jury service is that you agree to apply the law, as written, and as explained by the judge.
quote:
However It IS illegal to lie during the jury selection process in order to get on the jury so you can nullify the jury. Judges will instruct the jury to apply the law as it is written but nobody is legally compelled to arrive at a verdict based strictly on the law. The final arbiter of guilt is the jury and they can use whatever criteria they want (other than being bribed).
I can also ChatGPT the issue. I actually practice in it though so I don’t need to.
Absolutely zero of your opinions (as a hypothetical juror) on the law itself are relevant. You are to apply the law, as written and described, to the facts. There is zero subjective component insofar as you’re saying it leaves room for legal determinations.
This post was edited on 8/3/26 at 11:04 pm
Posted on 8/3/26 at 4:57 pm to djmed
That is not a curious quirk.
When the legal system does outrageous, repulsive shite every single day except sundays that is by design, not quirky.
When the legal system does outrageous, repulsive shite every single day except sundays that is by design, not quirky.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 5:08 pm to Sweep Da Leg
quote:
It’s been used multiple times in the DC circuit by the Marxists since Trump got back in office
No that’s just federal grand juries rejecting total nonsense.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 6:13 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
No that’s just federal grand juries rejecting total nonsense.
bullshite
Judges have made all sorts of idiotic decisions in the last 2 years.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 6:20 pm to djmed
Google AI
quote:Black radicals often haul John off the shelf to defend JN, though they aren't really talking about the same thing
John Adams strongly supported jury nullification, believing a juror has a duty to vote based on conscience even if it goes against the judge's instructions.
John Adams's Famous Quote on Juries
The quote: “It is not only the juror's right, but his duty to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the instruction of the court.”
Posted on 8/3/26 at 6:23 pm to djmed
Not an ice cubes chance in hell he walks. This is click bait bullshite.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 6:24 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:If there’s a mistrial the state retries him as many times as it takes for a verdict. There is no limit
I'm beginning to think we'll see a hung jury
He’s not getting away
This post was edited on 8/3/26 at 6:33 pm
Posted on 8/3/26 at 6:37 pm to Indefatigable
quote:
I can also ChatGPT the issue. I actually practice in it though so I don’t need to.
So Mr. ChatGPT
So can you point to a single case in the entire history of US law where any juror was charged with anything related to them knowingly ignoring the law and returning a verdict that goes against it? Just one? 250 years. 600+ million US citizens in the history of the US. Should be at least one example of someone being charged with this act you claim is clearly illegal.
Posted on 8/3/26 at 10:40 pm to RohanGonzales
quote:
Judges have made all sorts of idiotic decisions in the last 2 years.
Judges have never not made horrible decisions
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News