Jury Nullification Pros And Cons

Historically, jury nullification has been in the U.S. sense the 1930s during the prohibition era when the transportation and sale of alcohol was unlawful. According to research, in previous times jurors have ignored unpopular laws that are applied by the government and still do today (When the Jury Ignores the Law, 2015). Giving jurors the right to exercise the power of jury nullification would be unlawful and injustice.

Some history about jury nullification goes all the way back to English law. Research shows that it was created to check and balance on the government power and nullification has a big influence in American history today (The Life of the Law, 2015). Historically, during the revolutionary war it was unlawful to speak out toward the British, but juries would find the offenders innocent and also nullified to keep “bootleggers”

out of jail (The Life of the Law, 2015). Even though the power of ignoring the law was given to jurors for the U.S. history, in today’s society courts dislike the power of nullification and try to avert it.
Jury Nullification occurs when the jury gives a verdict of the offender not being guilty regardless if the offender is guilty with the violation they are being charged with.

Jury Nullification have various negative aspect of it. It has the power to distress the justice system. For example a jury that consider child pornography to be unlawful have the power to nullify. According to research, a jury that have knowledge of over populated prison rates and suppose the offender was aimed for their race can also nullify. A jury that suppose a harmless offender is a victim instead of a perpetrator can nullify (Mathews, 2014). Therefore, jury nullification is no good in most cases because it is not lawful nor justice in society. According to research, allowing jurors to have the power of jury nullification will cause them to forget about the laws and decide if the offender is guilty or not based on emotions (When the jury ignores the law, 2015). Nullification power would allow dangerous offender to be free without paying for their consequences. Therefore, the jury should decide the verdict based on the facts that are presented in

court.
There are various cases of purported jury nullification due to race such as, the O.J. Simpson and the George Zimmerman case. In today’s world America minority are being treated unfairly in the criminal justice system. George Zimmerman was found not guilty of the death of Trayvon Martin. Studies have shown that the jurors had two other choices to find Zimmerman guilty such as, second degree murder or manslaughter (Yan, 2013). Even though Zimmerman did commit a wrongful he was yet still found not guilty. Research also shows that Zimmerman racially profiled Travon Martin (Yan, 2013). People that are in favor of jury nullification suppose that it prevents injustice but yet still to be injustice by racism. O.J. Simpson was arrested for the murder of his wife. Research have shown that jury nullification stood at head with O.J trail. Simpson attorney embolden the jury to absolve Simpson regardless if they found him guilty so the jury can send a message to the LA police department (Jury Nullification, 2015). This trial was around the time of the LA riots and citizens felt like the justice system and the police were hard on black people and they did not want to have that image anymore.
In conclusion, allowing citizens to practice the power of having nullification is a wrongful act. It’s to risky to put unlimited power in the hands in of twelve people. They can take away the power of juror nullifying without taking away legal rights of the Constitution. Jury Nullification is not an act but it’s a power. Jury Nullification also causes turmoil to society such as, violent protest and riots. Nullification go against the principles that are applied regarding equal treatment under the law because of their standards. This method also encourage jurors to act on their own bases and be prejudices instead of going by the legal standards. Jurors also have shortage of knowing the judgments of the law and punishment. Regardless of how a juror feel a crime is a crime no matter the race, gender, economic status. The justice system is made to have “justice” and having the power to nullify is injustice. An offender should always have to pay for what they did that harmed an individual or a community.