18 replies to this topic

[frostz]

is it true that we are not legally obligated to swear the juror's oath, or at least swearing to the part that removes our rights of jury nullification.

has anyone personally seen any cases of people not swearing the juror's oath for this reason?

are there any consequences should a person refuse to swear the juror's oath or ask to have it amended to accommodate the fact that we are not legally obligated to swear away our rights of jury nullification.

such as could you be cited for contempt, even though you are technically not legally obligated to swear away your rights as a juror.

Edited by frostz, 27 July 2011 - 03:27 PM.

[MsRose]

I would imagine you aren't legally bound to take an oath, but if you don't take it then you wouldn't be able to participate in the trail. They would just pick someone else.

[DoraB]

I'm not 100% certain about taking the juror's oath, but I did believe that jury nullification pretty much ended after Klan trials and at the time of Brown v. Board, Furman v. Georgia, etc.

I don't know about consequences, and I'm not too sure on if you are trying to thwart jury duty or if this is for academic purposes.

[frostz]

I would imagine you aren't legally bound to take an oath, but if you don't take it then you wouldn't be able to participate in the trail. They would just pick someone else.

im unsure as to whether or not to look at the oath as for example a TOS to use something, or something like signing selective service which is supposidly mandatory and would have "repercussions" if i did not sign.

I'm not 100% certain about taking the juror's oath, but I did believe that jury nullification pretty much ended after Klan trials and at the time of Brown v. Board, Furman v. Georgia, etc.

I don't know about consequences, and I'm not too sure on if you are trying to thwart jury duty or if this is for academic purposes.

I already finished my service today, i just want to know cause the judge pretty much brushed my questions aside when i tried asking he.

the fact that she essentially did not say that jury nullification was illegal means that its still there, but she did mention that we swore away those rights with our oath, although she mumbled through this really quickly and i did not get the chance to get to ask the rest of my question.

Edited by frostz, 27 July 2011 - 03:34 PM.

[DoraB]

The legal process is very interesting. I'm actually applying to law school this upcoming Fall and was surprised to see a thread like this.

I think you CAN be cited for contempt of court if selected to become part of the jury (after you make it through the venire), you will then be mandated to take an oath, if not, then you will be found in contempt.

But the whole variable of "Jury Nullification" is very confusing, in regard to your question.

[frostz]

The legal process is very interesting. I'm actually applying to law school this upcoming Fall and was surprised to see a thread like this.

I think you CAN be cited for contempt of court if selected to become part of the jury (after you make it through the venire), you will then be mandated to take an oath, if not, then you will be found in contempt.

But the whole variable of "Jury Nullification" is very confusing, in regard to your question.

part of the oath requires that you swear that you will apply the law as the judge instructs, which directly contradicts with the idea of jury nullification in which the juror can find a verdict despite what the law states should they find the law to be unjust. Jury nullification which i believe is protected by the constitution, and there are no supreme court decisions that i know about which states that i have to swear away those rights.

can you be cited for contempt if you have a legitimate reason not to swear it, because the wording of the oath comes into contradiction with your rights

Edited by frostz, 27 July 2011 - 03:49 PM.

[DoraB]

Ok this is getting very technical.... lol

It most likely falls under the 6th amendment first of all.

Second, I don't think a Supreme Court has ever ruled on an individual in regard to jury nullification.

I'm not certain about your last statement though.

[frostz]

Ok this is getting very technical.... lol

It most likely falls under the 6th amendment first of all.

Second, I don't think a Supreme Court has ever ruled on an individual in regard to jury nullification.

I'm not certain about your last statement though.

i meant there is no supreme court ruling that says an individual is obligated to swear to give up these rights.

in fact U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Jay, says "it is not only the juror's right, but his duty, to fin dthe verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment and conscience, through in direct opposition to the direction of the court."

Edited by frostz, 27 July 2011 - 04:06 PM.

[DoraB]

There is a problem with what Jay says and a competing argument for Supreme Court dissenting and concurring opinions.

The legal process has changed greatly through different mindsets.

Christopher Langdell changed the legal curriculum, formalism was replaced with realism and so on.....

Jay was an old, if not the first?, Chief Justice and the mindset has changed over time in regard to how law evolves.


I doubt any case would be granted certiorari (ability for Supreme Court to hear the case) because contempt is trivial compared to actual/direct infractions against the Bill of Rights. (i.e. Mapp v. Ohio)

You may want to look into district court cases to find out what you're looking for, I wish I could help further, but you pose a good argument !

[frostz]

well it really doesn't matter if mindsets change, so long as there's no laws made afterwards that prohibits nullification from taking place, and there are none to my knowledge.

i was advised by the security guard to ask the judge at side bar the next time i get a jury duty summons but thats gona be like more than a year from now.

Although i highly doubt ill get an answer cause the judge is not legally obligated to answer me in regards to jury nullification, in fact i think they made laws specifically to prohibit the staff in the court room to talk about it.

so im kinda curious if anyone has experience (seen or have) denied taking the juror's oath

[WharfRat]

I already finished my service today, i just want to know cause the judge pretty much brushed my questions aside when i tried asking he.

the fact that she essentially did not say that jury nullification was illegal means that its still there, but she did mention that we swore away those rights with our oath, although she mumbled through this really quickly and i did not get the chance to get to ask the rest of my question.

Firstly, I think it's interesting you appeared in court today as a juror since you are in France...

Secondly, why bother? Just do the jury duty and serve the society that grants you the privilege of trial by jury.

If you really wanted to get out of it, you probably should have told them that you would view the case from a biased viewpoint due to x,y, or z in the selection stage.

Suck it up and just do it...

[frostz]

Firstly, I think it's interesting you appeared in court today as a juror since you are in France...

Secondly, why bother? Just do the jury duty and serve the society that grants you the privilege of trial by jury.

If you really wanted to get out of it, you probably should have told them that you would view the case from a biased viewpoint due to x,y, or z in the selection stage.

Suck it up and just do it...

umm i came back from France like 2 weeks ago? Since its been a month between the day i said i left etc etc.. ... .. yea... .... .........

I already did my jury duty for this year, i specifically said in an above post that i just finished with it this week.

Assuming that i am asking this for the sole purpose to get "out of it", going from a biased point of view does not work, because some guy tried that today and was sent back to the jury pool to be reselected for a civil case. Even though he should have been finished today, hes probably gona be here for another 2-3 days.

Besides since it was a murder case i honestly would have wanted to know whether or not i could have exercised my rights of jurors nullification if it came down to it.

taking the oath + jury nullification = can be cited for perjury or something along those lines

Edited by frostz, 27 July 2011 - 11:06 PM.

[iargue]

You do not seem to understand "jury nullification" whatsoever at all, in any form or method. Jury Nullification is not done by a single person, or a single jury. It is done by multiple juries choosing to rule against the law, as the law is seen unjust. By taking your oath, you do not wave this right, as it is not a right of yours to have. It is a right of -everyone-

When you swear, you are to swear this, " "Do you and each of you solemnly swear that you will well and truly try and a true deliverance make between the United States and ______, the defendant at the bar, and a true verdict render according to the evidence, so help you God?" " which simply states that you will look at the facts and rule according to the fact. IT does not state that you must rule according to the law, but only according to the facts. If you feel the facts finds him worthy of punishment, you vote guilty. If you find that they do not (Because there should be no law to be broken) then you rule innocent.

A oath is nothing but an oath. It is there so people with morals will follow the law. It does nothing to stop you from doing what you want to do in any way shape or form.

[MoriNoRyu]

Long story short.
Swearing the oath does not swear away your right of jury nullification.

What would be helpful is if you could direct me to a copy of your jurors oath as most jurors oaths do NOT say anything regarding juror nullification.

[frostz]

the juror's oath that our judge had the jurors swear also included a line in which we had to agree to something like this, its not the exact wording but you get the idea. we were to only consider whether the facts in a case meet the letter of the law when arriving at the verdict, and strictly adhere to the judges instructions when it comes to interpreting the law.

in effect swearing away right of juror's nullification.

besides a single juror who chooses to vote differently from everyone else would result in a hung trial anyway, which is probably better than a sentence if i don't think that the defendant deserves it.

Its just that because of the oath, if the juror votes differently despite the fact that the evidence overwhelmingly points to guilty, then they could get accused of perjury. I could not take the oath seriously sure, but that doesn't mean the judge wouldn't when they accuse me of breaking it.

Edited by frostz, 28 July 2011 - 09:05 AM.

[iargue]

the juror's oath that our judge had the jurors swear also included a line in which we had to agree to something like this, its not the exact wording but you get the idea. we were to only consider whether the facts in a case meet the letter of the law when arriving at the verdict, and strictly adhere to the judges instructions when it comes to interpreting the law.

in effect swearing away right of juror's nullification.

besides a single juror who chooses to vote differently from everyone else would result in a hung trial anyway, which is probably better than a sentence if i don't think that the defendant deserves it.

Its just that because of the oath, if the juror votes differently despite the fact that the evidence overwhelmingly points to guilty, then they could get accused of perjury. I could not take the oath seriously sure, but that doesn't mean the judge wouldn't when they accuse me of breaking it.

Your job is to consider the facts, and they ask for your judgement. Therefor you can rule any way that you want.

[frostz]

Your job is to consider the facts, and they ask for your judgement. Therefor you can rule any way that you want.

I am supposed to rule according to the law that the judge gives me, and i vote guilty or not guilty depending on whether or not the evidence that was given proves without a doubt that the defendant broke the law.

The law as instructed by the judge according to the oath.

Meaning that i cannot rule any way i want if the evidence that was given proves without a doubt that the law was broken. Unless i exercise my rights of jurors nullification which according to the judge who actually specifically said that we swore away those rights with our oath when i mentioned the issue.

Hence the question of what happens if i refuse to take the oath, because juror's nullification should be protected under US law, and as i had mentioned before i have yet to find a court ruling that makes me legally obligated to swear away those rights.

[polyneux]

You're supposed to rule according to the law that is law, not according to the law that the judge or anyone else "gives you"

Both the Defense and Prosecuting attorneys will bring up laws relevant to the case and you can pretty much assume that they will be correct because they would argue.

The Judge gives very clear instructions and it usually requires no interpretation of the law by you whatsoever....

Usually in the case of a murder trial it involves returning Not-Guilty if you have any reasonable doubt.

When you go through Jury Selection in Florida they both ask if you have a problem swearing an oath via religion or other means, and have you also sign a legal document with details like silence clauses, etc. that are special to that case. It is on this grounds that they charge you for contempt of course if you all of the sudden decide you don't want to play ball.

[frostz]

You're supposed to rule according to the law that is law, not according to the law that the judge or anyone else "gives you"

Both the Defense and Prosecuting attorneys will bring up laws relevant to the case and you can pretty much assume that they will be correct because they would argue.

The Judge gives very clear instructions and it usually requires no interpretation of the law by you whatsoever....

Usually in the case of a murder trial it involves returning Not-Guilty if you have any reasonable doubt.

When you go through Jury Selection in Florida they both ask if you have a problem swearing an oath via religion or other means, and have you also sign a legal document with details like silence clauses, etc. that are special to that case. It is on this grounds that they charge you for contempt of course if you all of the sudden decide you don't want to play ball.

the entire point of jury nullification is that i'm allowed to completely disregard the law when coming up with a verdict though

and the judge was pretty specific in that we are to follow their instructions on the law in the oath.

So for example if the judge says "(insert race here) are all guilty" and so therefore the defendant must be guilty, then according to the oath i swore i would have to vote guilty because i'm supposed to follow the judge's instructions on the law so to speak.

so again, would a judge take exception and find me in contempt if i declined to swear the oath on the grounds of them trying to fit something in that removes my jury nullification rights.