An ex-solider in the UK has been found guilty by a jury of possessing a firearm. The ex-solider found the gun in his garden and handed it into a police station. The prosecutor said that his honest intent is not relevant to the law. All that is relevant is whether the ex-solider possessed the gun - presumably he possessed it while taking it to the police station to hand it in!
http://www.thisissurreytoday.co.uk/news/Ex-soldier-faces-jail-handing-gun/article-1509082-detail/article.html
The jury actually found the man guilty!
Why wasn't the jury told about jury nullification i.e. if the law is immoral or incorrectly applied they can return a non-guilty verdict or just return non-guilty for any reason they think of?
Why isn't jury nullification taught in English schools?
Why did not of the lawyers involved in this farce tell the jury about nullification?
The UK has gone crazy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment