Re: jury nullification, jury veto, jury pardon

"Larry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Scout" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> The Model Penal Code (MPC) says the force used in self-defense must be
a
> >> lesser harm than that which you're facing.  So burning down an empty
> >> building to save your life is justified; killing multiple people inside
a
> >> building to save your single life is not.
> >>
> >> Even the NY and VA statutes I cited say you can do whatever is
"reasonably
> >> necessary" - you ne3ed to convince a jury that whatever step you took
was
> >> reasonably necessary, and not excessive or unreasonable.
> >
> >In short,. I have to convince the jury to null....I mean acquit me no
matter
> >what the law says.
>
> Well, the defendant doesn't HAVE to convince the jury of anything.  But
> your statement summarizes what the defendant tries to do.  Obviously.

Well given the issue we are discussing, a clear violation of the law, then
he certainly needs to convince the jury that there is a good and valid
reason for acquittal beyond that section of statutory law.....oh, but we
can't have that....that would be NULLIFICATION. Na, let the bastard swing,
after all, just because the law is Unconstitutional or unfair that's no
reason to acquit......or so you have tried to tell me.