[PLUG-TALK] Re: [PLUG] Sounds good to me ;)
Russ Johnson
russj at dimstar.net
Wed Jun 19 06:09:35 UTC 2002
No, not wrong. Juries view the facts as presented by the lawyers, and decide whether the facts say you broke the law as written. They do not interpret that law, other than to understand it.
The Supreme Court has the power to not only overturn convictions, but overturn laws that are unjust. Juries can't do that. The Supreme Court interprets the law and can say wether an earlier decision was wrong or not. They not only interpret to understand, they interpret to define what they law says.
On Tue, 18 Jun 2002 22:56:43 -0000
"J Henshaw" <jeff at jhenshaw.com> wrote:
> Wrong again, for that exact reason we had a jury of peers, who were
> comprised your 12 closest neighbors.
> And if they had any critical thinking skills they could be trusted to use
> sound judgement; why do you suppose they changed the system a little and
> sequester the juries now?
> Isn't this an indication that the average juror has NO critical thinking
> skills?
> If you do why do you allow them to tell you what you can or cannot read?
> Furthermore any law is null and void for vagueness, and if the "Supremes"
> can't agree it must be pretty damned vague, I should say.
--
"The power to untie is stronger than the power to tie."
Well, yeah, otherwise my shoes would tie themselves.
---
Russ Johnson
Stargate Online
http://www.dimstar.net
telnet://telnet.dimstar.net
ICQ: 3739685:Airneil
More information about the PLUG-talk
mailing list