Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!ptownson
From: ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu (Patrick A. Townson)
Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk
Subject: Re: Amendments
Message-ID: <1991May3.043935.25738@eecs.nwu.edu>
Date: 3 May 91 04:39:35 GMT
References: <1991Apr26.141044.7544@alphalpha.com> <1991Apr28.061119.18402@eecs.nwu.edu> <1991May2.202641.3154@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Lines: 20


In article <1991May2.202641.3154@mailer.cc.fsu.edu>
otto@fsu1.cc.fsu.edu writes:

>In article <1991Apr28.061119.18402@eecs.nwu.edu>, ptownson@eecs.nwu.edu (Patrick A. Townson) writes...

>>I wish you would recall that it is supposed to be 'we the people' who
>>do the governing, make the laws and decide how things are done ... why
>>aren't we allowed to do it any longer?
>
>There's one place left.  In the jury box, you can acquit no matter what
>the judge may desire...John G. Otto   jgo@fsu.bitnet  jgo@rai.cc.fsu.edu


Not true. The judge can overrule the jury, and/or dismiss the jury and
declare a mis-trial, etc.  Not long ag here, a jury was hung, 8-4 on
the guilt or innocence of a defendant. The judge told the 4 who were
holding out for a verdict of innocene to 'reconsider' their opinion.
He did not tell the 8 who were hold out for a verdict of guilty that
that they had to reconsider anything.