Fully Informed Jury Association

Are you fully informed about jury nullification?

Jury Nullification | 07 Apr 2011

Thoughts on the Actions of a Public Servant


Pursuant to the ACLU’s filing to show cause why the Administrative Order issued by Belvin Perry should not be overturned, Perry’s office has filed the response (click here to download and read) which follows my comments.

I am sure that everyone else has already noticed that there is a further attempt to demonize jury nullification by comparing it to devil worship or some such, which is standard practice for almost all government employees in the justice branch of government. It is a well-established and accepted fact that jury nullification does not interfere with the orderly administration of justice, but is instead the primary factor in the administration of justice under our constitutional and common law form of government. That is why we are guaranteed right to the protection of trial by jury. I would refer anyone to the Magna Carta, which establishes human rights under the law and the protection of those rights by the jury. The jury, as we all know, is the substantive and final authority on the application of law, precisely because the jury has the ability to refuse to enforce venal, vicious, or unfair laws or prosecutions which government may attempt to impose upon the people.

There can be no honest or rational appeal (to protection of the orderly administration of justice) against the jury and its inherent rights and obligations to consider the law, consult among fellow jurors as to the propriety and justice of the law and its application, and to render a verdict which manifests justice. Without such inherent rights and obligations of the jurors, government could pass any over-reaching or venal law desired, and the people would be helpless against that law. The private and final deliberations of the jurors and the verdict they render, is the orderly administration of justice.  To deny this fact is to betray the very foundation of our justice system.

For a government employee to prohibit the free speech education of any person—whether a juror or not—about the rights of jurors and potential jurors to peacefully protect themselves from harmful  laws is a violation of human rights.  To limit the rights of anyone to teach the authority of the jurors anywhere is a contradiction of the intent, scope, and application of justice under the right to trial by jury.

Again, one cannot argue for the “orderly administration of justice,” which has, at its foundation, the informed and independent juror, while arguing against providing the jurors with this knowledge of their authority and proper role in our justice system.  One cannot, in good faith or honesty, argue against providing that information to all jurors in any instance, at any time or place. Quite the contrary: under our system of justice, all jurors should be informed of this authority at the time they are first requested to serve on jury duty.

Government servants such as Belvin Perry, who are our servants and employees, have forgotten their place.

Iloilo Marguerite Jones