On a jury, it only takes one

One of the most important lessons my parents taught me was “Reasonable, intelligent people can disagree.”

It was more difficult trying to teach me how to be one of those people. I’m still not sure if the lesson took.

The editorial in the inaugural edition of Exhibit A touches on one of those issues where reason and passion can be found on both sides of the argument: jury nullification. I’m in favor of it. If I were on a jury, I could not in good conscience vote for conviction if I thought the law in the case was unjust. I view it as a form of civil disobedience.

On the other hand, there are smart people out there who will argue that we are a nation of laws — not individuals — and refusing to enforce one of those laws can’t lead anywhere good. I see their point. I understand it.

But, it only takes one of me on a jury.

Think I’m wrong?

del.ico.us  |  Reddit  |  furl  |  StumbleUpon  |  Facebook  |  digg

> Next Story