Jurors: Following Their Conscious or The Law

In my opinion, juror nullification should be allowed within the court process because juries always had the power to ignore the law. I believe it’s moral for jurors to acquit an accused on trial if they feel the law is unjust. Without jury nullification, individuals have a greater chance of being wrongfully sentenced, jurors would not have the freedom to use their conscious in decision making, and those who are accused in need of treatment would receive rather harsh punishment.

There is a long complicated process when selecting a jury for a criminal trial. This means that your average Joe on the street can’t just fill out a couple of documents and become a part of the jury. Jurors must meet all requirements and the Crown Attorney and/or lawyers then get to choose individuals to participate in the specified trial. The individuals who get chosen for the jury get to decide the accused’s fate and if they refuse to follow the law there is no punishments for them. Therefore, nothing is at stake for the juror who disagrees with a particular law that was broken. Also, juror nullification allows jurors to analyze important elements of a case and critically determine an individual’s guilt according to the law. For example, if a man is at court being accused of assault with a deadly weapon, the juror can examine any underlying facts in the case and may acknowledge that the man being accused was rightfully defending himself.

Secondly, juror nullification allows jurors to out-weigh the crime that was committed and the accused’s circumstances, such as mitigating factors, family, job, and any previous records and so forth. Although the judge uses his/her discretion the most, the jury has the freedom to follow their conscious and decide what a justified fair punishment is. Without juror’s feedback on the case, the punishment then lays upon the hands of the judge who serves a completely different agenda opposed to the defendant. For example, if there is a coloured man being accused and the entire court is dominantly white, then majority rules in favor of the white men verses the one coloured male. Justice should display equality and fairness and jurors play a significant part in upholding the flaws in the system citizens must abide by.

Juror nullification is beneficial to all when the mentally challenged accused who committed an offence is granted treatment rather than punishment. We all know 99% of those who enter jail are released eventually and that is because institutions serve as temporary parking lots for societies unwanted. Without juror nullification, special needs offenders will get thrown in jail due to petty crimes and only become better criminals and serve a threat in communities. On the other hand, if juror nullification was allowed then mentally challenged individuals can by-pass the jail environment and seek treatment to prevent further danger against themselves and their surroundings. This will not only benefit the accused, but also his/her family, the community and save the courts money that could have been invested elsewhere.

Finally, jurors are chosen for a reason and their conclusions based on a case should be valued whether or not they agree with policy makers.