|
Jury Nullification
Jury nullification, also known as jury equity or as a perverse verdict, is a decision by the jury in a trial, criminal trial resulting in a verdict of Acquittal, not guilty even though they think a defendant has broken the law. The jury's reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant's case, that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. It has been commonly used to oppose what jurors perceive as Rule according to higher law, unjust laws, such as those that once penalized runaway slaves under the Fugitive slave laws in the United States, Fugitive Slave Act, prohibited alcohol during Prohibition in the United States, Prohibition, or criminalized Vietnam War draft, draft evasion during the Vietnam War. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant. Such verdicts are possible because a jury has ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Trial Of The Seven Bishops
The Seven Bishops were members of the Church of England tried and acquitted for seditious libel in the Court of King's Bench (England), Court of Kings Bench in June 1688. The very unpopular prosecution of the bishops is viewed as a significant event contributing to the November 1688 Glorious Revolution and deposition of James II of England, James II. In November 1685, James II dismissed the Parliament of England for refusing to pass measures removing legal restrictions on Catholics and Protestant Nonconformist (Protestantism), Nonconformists. In August 1686, the Parliament of Scotland suffered the same fate and neither body met again until 1689. James nevertheless imposed the measures in April 1687 though a royal Declaration of Indulgence (1687), Declaration of Indulgence which was widely opposed in both countries, including by Nonconformists who feared this would jeopardise their hopes of readmission to the Church of England. The Declaration was reissued in April 1688, and Jame ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judgment Notwithstanding Verdict
In the United States, Judgment notwithstanding the verdict, also called judgment ''non obstante veredicto'', or JNOV, is a type of judgment as a matter of law that is sometimes rendered at the conclusion of a jury trial. In American state courts, JNOV is the practice whereby the presiding judge in a civil jury trial may overrule the decision of a jury and reverse or amend their verdict. In literal terms, the judge enters a judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict. The rarely granted intervention permits the judge to exercise discretion to avoid extreme and unreasonable jury decisions. In civil cases in U.S. federal court, the term was replaced in 1991 by the renewed judgment as a matter of law, which emphasizes its relationship to the judgment as a matter of law, formerly called a directed verdict.See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50, ''Notes of Advisory Committee on Rules—1991 Amendment'' (noting the replacement of motions for "directed verdict or for judgment notwithstandi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Shadow Defense
A shadow defense is a legal defense that cannot be sustained on its own merits but opens the door to introducing evidence that will assist in seeking jury nullification, and gives the jury an excuse to acquit. A "shadow defense" also may refer to a tactic by defending counsel that is not expected to be successful as a matter of law; it is, instead, a pretext for bringing information into the court that would otherwise be irrelevant and therefore inadmissible. An insanity defense might be used to present evidence about a person's troubled childhood, for instance, or a defendant might claim self-defense or duress in order to present evidence about an abusive relationship that nonetheless did not present an imminent mortal danger to the defendant. An entrapment defense opens the door to presenting evidence about the behavior of police and informants. It is reversible error for a trial court to refuse a jury instruction on a theory of defense after a defendant makes a threshold show ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Stealth Juror
A stealth juror or rogue juror is a person who, motivated by a hidden agenda in reference to a legal case, attempts to be seated on the jury and to influence the outcome. Legal scholars believe that lawyers can identify stealth jurors by paying close attention to non-verbal behavior connected with deception and identifying discrepancies between answers to oral ''voir dire'' and written questionnaires. A potential stealth juror may be hard to read and excessively reserved. The potential for stealth jurors to jury nullification, nullify death penalty statutes has prompted calls to eliminate the requirement of a unanimous verdict in jury trials. On the other hand, the argument has been raised that stealth jurors can serve as a defense against bad laws. Clay Conrad has stated that libertarian-minded ''voir dire'' members can and should increase their odds of getting on a jury by telling the prosecutors what they want to hear, without actually lying. Jurors who lie to get on a jury can ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
In Limine
In U.S. law, a motion ''in limine'' (, "at the start"; literally, "on the threshold") is a motion, discussed outside the presence of the jury, to request that certain testimony be excluded. A motion ''in limine'' can also be used to get a ruling to allow for the inclusion of evidence. The motion is decided by a judge in both civil and criminal proceedings. It is frequently used at pre-trial hearings or during trial, and it can be used at both the state and federal levels. ''Black's Law Dictionary'' (8th ed. 2004) defines "motion ''in limine'' as "a pretrial request that certain inadmissible evidence not be referred to or offered at trial." They are made "preliminary", and are presented for consideration of the judge, arbitrator or hearing officer, to be decided without the merits being reached first. The reasons for the motions are wide and varied, but probably the most frequent use of the motion ''in limine'' in a criminal trial is to shield the jury from information conc ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Argument
An argument is a series of sentences, statements, or propositions some of which are called premises and one is the conclusion. The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's conclusion via justification, explanation, and/or persuasion. Arguments are intended to determine or show the degree of truth or acceptability of another statement called a conclusion. The process of crafting or delivering arguments, argumentation, can be studied from three main perspectives: the logical, the dialectical and the rhetorical perspective. In logic, an argument is usually expressed not in natural language but in a symbolic formal language, and it can be defined as any group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from the others through deductively valid inferences that preserve truth from the premises to the conclusion. This logical perspective on argument is relevant for scientific fields such as mathematics and computer science. Logic is the study of the form ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Self-government
Self-governance, self-government, self-sovereignty or self-rule is the ability of a person or group to exercise all necessary functions of regulation without intervention from an external authority. It may refer to personal conduct or to any form of institution, such as family units, social groups, affinity groups, legal bodies, industry bodies, religions, and political entities of various degrees. Self-governance is closely related to various philosophical and socio-political concepts such as autonomy, independence, self-control, self-discipline, and sovereignty. In the context of nation states, self-governance is called national sovereignty which is an important concept in international law. In the context of administrative division, a self-governing territory is called an autonomous region. Self-governance is also associated with political contexts in which a population or demographic becomes independent from colonial rule, absolute government, absolute monarchy, o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Deontic
In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek: and ) is the normative ethical theory that the morality of an action should be based on whether that action itself is right or wrong under a series of rules and principles, rather than based on the consequences of the action. It is sometimes described as duty-, obligation-, or rule-based ethics. Deontological ethics is commonly contrasted to consequentialism, utilitarianism, virtue ethics, and pragmatic ethics. In this terminology, action is more important than the consequences. The term ''deontological'' was first used to describe the current, specialised definition by C. D. Broad in his 1930 book, ''Five Types of Ethical Theory''. Older usage of the term goes back to Jeremy Bentham, who coined it prior to 1816 as a synonym of ''dicastic'' or ''censorial ethics'' (i.e., ethics based on judgement). The more general sense of the word is retained in French, especially in the term ''code de déontologie'' (et ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Juror's Oath
A juror's oath is used to swear in jurors at the beginning of jury selection or trial. Australia In a New South Wales juror's oath, the juror promises to "...well and truly try and true deliverance make between our Sovereign Lady the Queen [or the King] and the accused whom you shall have in charge, and a true verdict give according to the evidence." In Western Australia each juror has a choice to either "swear by Almighty God" or "solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm" to "give a true verdict according to the evidence upon the issue(s) to be tried by me." In Queensland each juror has a choice for an Oath or Affirmation. The Oath is as follows: :You will conscientiously try the charges and decide them according to evidence. You will not disclose anything about the Jury's deliberations other than as allowed or required by law. So help you God. The Affirmation is as follows: :Do you solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare that you will conscientiously try the charges ag ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Samuel Chase
Samuel Chase (April 17, 1741 – June 19, 1811) was a Founding Fathers of the United States, Founding Father of the United States, signer of the Continental Association and United States Declaration of Independence as a representative of Maryland, and Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. In 1804, Chase Impeachment of Samuel Chase, was impeached by the United States House of Representatives, House of Representatives on grounds of letting his partisan leanings affect his court decisions, but was acquitted the following year by the United States Senate, Senate and remained in office. He is the only United States Supreme Court Justice to have ever been impeached. Born near Princess Anne, Maryland, Chase established a legal practice in Annapolis, Maryland. He served in the Maryland General Assembly for several years and favored independence during the American Revolution. He won election to the Continental Congress before serving on the Baltimore District Criminal Co ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Jury Trial
A jury trial, or trial by jury, is a legal proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial, in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions. Jury trials are increasingly used in a significant share of serious criminal cases in many common law judicial systems, but not all. Juries or lay judges have also been incorporated into the legal systems of many civil law countries for criminal cases. The use of jury trials, which evolved within common law systems rather than civil law systems, has had a profound impact on the nature of American civil procedure and criminal procedure rules, even if a bench trial is actually contemplated in a particular case. In general, the availability of a jury trial if properly demanded has given rise to a system in which fact finding is concentrated in a single trial rather than multiple hearings, and appellate review of trial court decisions is greatly limited. Jury trials are of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
English Law
English law is the common law list of national legal systems, legal system of England and Wales, comprising mainly English criminal law, criminal law and Civil law (common law), civil law, each branch having its own Courts of England and Wales, courts and Procedural law, procedures. The judiciary is judicial independence, independent, and legal principles like Procedural justice, fairness, equality before the law, and the right to a fair trial are foundational to the system. Principal elements Although the common law has, historically, been the foundation and prime source of English law, the most authoritative law is statutory legislation, which comprises Act of Parliament, Acts of Parliament, Statutory Instrument, regulations and by-laws. In the absence of any statutory law, the common law with its principle of ''stare decisis'' forms the residual source of law, based on judicial decisions, custom, and usage. Common law is made by sitting judges who apply both United Kingdom l ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
