Rich Paul
I always thought the language in RSA 519:23-a (commonly referred to as the jury nullification statute) was weak. In fact, the state’s attorney argued in front of the NH supreme court that before it passed into law, the legislature stripped all mention of jury nullification from the original bill. From the state’s perspective, their attorney was correct, and the supreme court unanimously affirmed that the statute is not a jury nullification statute. Here’s their seven-page decision.
The statute in question is a shadow of what it should have been. Perhaps the legislature can try again and get it right this time. Until then, whether or not a defendant will be allowed to tell a jury about nullification (which has happened multiple times thus far in NH) remains up-to-the-judge in the case, it seems. Stay tuned to Free Keene for or NHJury.com for the latest news about jury rights in New Hampshire.
Reason has an excellent take on the news here, and FIJA’s opinion is here.
Awww … and all those fucking stupid pamphlets you douchebags had printed up that stressed jury nullification. We all told you there was no such thing – now you have your answer. What ever are you shitbags going to do now?
Why do all the StopFreeKeene trolls have filthy mouths.
Because his goal is to drive all respectable people away from reading this blog to prevent its dangerous ideas from being propagated. It seems rather bizarre the operators of this website will put so much time into writing the articles, but have no time to moderate the comments. It’s as if they don’t realize that the articles they spend so much time writing will be missed by all people who want to avoid being offended by the deluge of obscene and profane comments.
Actually it’s more than bizarre, it’s irrational.
Holmes are you against chelmtrails
If the detractors are gun grabbers or would not make a stand at Bundy’s then they should be banned
I’m good on both counts
Chemtrails are good for your health. They strengthen your immune system.
Those people would already know to avoid comment sections on most websites.
Jury nullification does happen from time to time. You are delusional if you think there is “no such thing”.
The rule of law is a myth.
Carla Gericke doesn’t agree with you. Her $57,000 Constitutional award was very real.
‘Rule of Law’ helped save her situation…
http://rt.com/usa/164576-police-lawsuit-filming-us/
I prevailed on a similar lawsuit when I sued the police also. “First US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled ” What is this first Circuit court that ruled? A group of people? So then, your evidence is “some guys said so”? Why didn’t the rules jump off the page and make them pay? Why did people have to get involved? The idea behind the “rule of law” is that we are ruled according to the rules, rather than the arbitrary dictates of authority figures. Showing that an authority figure “ruled” something only proves that you are ruled by PEOPLE, not… Read more »
“‘Rule of Law’ helped save her situation…”
If you are trying to use this as an argument to prove the rule of law, this is a fallacious appeal to consequences.
The constitution didn’t stop them from violating her rights in the first place did it? If she would have held up the constitution like a cross to a vampire, would that stop them?
The courts will typically correct mistakes by police if you present a good case and good evidence of mistakes. That’s been my experience.
Courts are reasonable for the most part.
“Courts are reasonable for the most part.”
“Courts” being a euphemism for men and women who wear black robes?
So…rule by men…or rule by law? The cops do not necessarily obey the law(while they supposedly enforce the same “laws” they are breaking in the process) but they will obey the men/women(if they have the proper magical robe)? How does that set of facts show rule by law (rather than rule by men)?
In other words your evidence is merely anecdotal. Thus the conclusion you reach regarding all courts suffers from the logical fallacy of “faulty generalization.”
There are real criminals in society.
If we had 1000’s of private anarchiy based systems of police and courts, the smart criiminals would simply prey on the weakest areas with no courts no police, weak courts, weak police etc. Criminals could also easily evade detection without any centralized tracking systems.
Criminals would love anarchy because anarchy is extremely soft on crime (intentionally or unintentionally).
Under anarchism it might be bad at first, over time society would flourish much like the California gold rush, where there was virtually no government.
LoL … STFU you juvenile moron.
speaking of Rich Paul and Jury Nullification…
Marijuana Stops Cancer Growth – Science Proving It – It’s All Been Lies
http://blog.seattlepi.com/marijuana/2013/10/22/new-research-shows-marijuana-compounds-do-fight-cancer/
“It’s all been lies til now. All conflict of interest. No competition for
the power players, and that’s why they wanted it this way. Cops went
along with it, so did everybody else that got paid off it. All lies.”
(posted by woodman101 @ http://www.dailypaul.com/303288/marijuana-stops-cancer-growth-science-proving-it-its-all-been-lies)
“The bottom line here, he says, is that when all of the chemicals are burned or eaten at once – the usual way cannabis is used medicinally and recreationally – the positive, cancer-fighting effects could be lost in the mix. “I’m not saying that cannabis itself, as the whole plant, won’t work. We just don’t know. We need a lot more studies and a lot more trials to study that fact. However, what we have (now) … is that these purified forms do have an effect and if it does work it could save patients,” he said.”” So the non-psychoactive… Read more »
StopFreeKeene Troll aka Ivey Mike
Why do you post under 20 different names?
You realize it has lots of other medicinal properties, too, right? Or are you still going off of the government lies you were indoctrinated into?
homes why do sfk close comment section? do we allow communists the right to speak when they don’t care for free speech?
http://postimg.org/gallery/gfkadhz6/564a238e/
Holmes originals $10,000
All proceeds go to fk
[…] NH supreme court decides ‘jury nullification’ law is not a jury nullification law in Ri… and why its a much stronger defense to challenge concrete issues of fact rather than interpretive issues of law/opinion. […]
clash of clan hack
http://bit.ly/1yzw67b
[…] you may know, in late 2014 the NH supreme court decided against Rich Paul’s appeal, claiming the “jury nullification” bill of 2012 was not in point-of-fact, a jury […]
[…] you may know, in late 2014 the NH supreme court decided against Rich Paul’s appeal, claiming the “jury nullification” bill of 2012 was not in point-of-fact, a jury […]