"Look, Mr. Straun, John, I can also call John?" We've been at this for 25 days on the road. We are all sick of it. We all want to go home. You're still the only one left. You're the one keep us here. I do things at home. I go to work and earn their living. to do all of us. The judge is mad as hell at us. You will hang this jury. go here make three-month trial a farce and waste of time. They have no right to vote acquittal. You heard the judge's instructions.The jury is not allowed to judge the law, only the facts. "
"The fact than during the day, is not it?" Dillard ranted. "She acknowledged that his was for us. The man was found with marijuana in his car. It's against the law. And the man removed the marijuana. What you'll need," said Raymond Dillard, the jury foreman. Raymond Dillard was tall, strong, in the 30s, and he was angry, so angry, he wanted the head of John the Baptist's Straun on strike
Straun was asmall, slender man in his 30s, with your back straight, dark brown hair, large, steady eyes and a firm mouth. He did not seem at all the trouble he caused to care. And he seemed fearless.
John Straun said, "I do not care what the judge said. I happen to know for a fact that a jury has the right to know and judge the law. Jury nullification has a long history in this country. A jury has the right to judge the law, not just the facts. "
Raymond Dillard and a few othersJurors scornfully. Dillard said, "Oh, you're a lawyer, Mr. Straun? You think you know more than the judge, what history are you talking about?"
John Straun said calmly, "No, I am not a lawyer. I'm an engineer. But in this particular case, I know more than the judge. When I learned I was to be on this jury, I did a little research on the history the jury, just for the hell of it. Most people do not know, but jury nullification has been confirmed as a sacred lawEntities in English common law since 1000 years. Alfred the Great, a great English king a thousand years ago, hung several of his own judges, because they could be condemned, rejected the jurors and replaced these courageous jurors with other jurors, they removed in order that the defendants intimidated in court. "
"Jury cancellation occurs even at the beginning of our country as one of the most important rights that our founding fathers wanted to protect. Our founding fathers wanted juries tothe last bulwark against the tyrannical government laws. Therefore, they have emphasized the right to a trial in three of the first ten amendments to the Constitution. John Adams, second president of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, third President and author of the Declaration of Independence, John Jay, First Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, and Alexander Hamilton, First Secretary of the Treasury stated flatly that all juries have the right and the duty to assess not only the facts ina case, but also the right, according to their conscience. "
"Not only that, but recent court decisions have reaffirmed this right. In 1969, in" U.S.. vs. Moylan, "The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the right of the jury on the law in a case to judge. In 1972, Washington, DC Court of Appeals confirmed essentially the same."
Raymond Dillard said, "Yes, if that's the case, how come the judge did not tell us that?"
"This is because of the despicable SupremeCourt to rule in "Sparf and Hansen vs. The United States in 1895." Straun said John. "The decision said jury has the right to judge the law, but that a judge will not be informed of this right to juries. Cute, huh? And guess what happens after this decision? Judge stopped to tell juries of their rights .
"The judge knows the jury nullification. All the judges decide to do. But let them hate juries, the law. They hate the power of juries away from them. For this reason,Judge never mentioned the right to a jury to judge the right to say, most judges and counsel to squash anything about it in court. Remember when Jimmy Saunders' defense began to talk about it? The judge threatened him with contempt if he is not included on the jury nullification. "
"And since you asked me," Straun continued, "I will tell you a little more about jury nullification. Have you ever heard of the Act, Fugitive Slave? Have you ever Prohibition? Haveknow why these laws were atrocious be lifted? Because juries were so outraged by these laws that they consistently refused to people who convert them hurt. They refused to condemn them, because they knew that these laws were unjust and tyrannical, that Congress had no right to have these laws in the first place. So, because juries would not condemn the government could not keep these laws. They tried for many years but gave up eventually. "
"What do you think this insane war againstDrugs is that we have struggled the last sixty years? It is the same as Prohibition in the 20s. It's the same principle. A tyrannical government tells people that they have no drugs, just like in the 20s said that the people do not drink alcohol. What is the difference? A tyrannical law tells people what they can or not put in their own bodies. Who owns our bodies, us or the self-righteous politicians? Has the Government's own body, Mr. Dillard? Do you smoke,Mr. Dillard? Did you drink beer? "
Dillard nodded: "Yes, I do."
"Well, how would you like it if they tell you laws that do not smoke or drink a beer, be passed. If you want, Mr. Dillard?
Dillard, John Straun was thinking about the question then was: "No, I do not want Straun."
John Straun turned to the other around the table. "Hey, Jack, you said you are sixty-five. You want to play golf, right? What if theyadopted a law that says you can not play golf over sixty-five, because the exercise might give him a heart attack? You, Frank, you said you eat hamburgers at McDougal's all the time. What if they passed a law saying people heart attacks greasy hamburgers, so we are closed all the McDougal restaurants in the country and make it a crime to eat a hamburger? You, Mrs. Pelchat, I see you like to smoke. Everyone knows that smoking may have lung cancer. How would you likewhen they passed a law banning all cigarettes? What if they were in the door of your house without a warrant for the search for cigarettes in your house crash, as do the SWAT team now on the lookout for drugs? Mrs. Pelchat, how you want to be in court like Jimmy Saunders because they have a pack of cigarettes that you found hiding under the mattress? "
"You know, see everything, what I mean?" If they can not smoke it a crime for Jimmy Saunders marijuana, why do not they make golf, hamburgers and cigarettesa crime? If you think they would not try again. They had Prohibition in the 20s for almost ten years until they finally abandoned. The only reason she is not banned cigarettes, because it would be screaming thirty million smokers in this country, the bloody murder are. You do away with marijuana and other illicit drugs only because drug users are a small minority in this country. Drug users have no political influence. "
Raymond Dillard sat down in hisChair. The others talked among themselves. John Straun started seeing heads nodding in agreement, thinking about what he had said.
"OK, Straun," said Dillard. "Maybe you're right. Maybe Jimmy Saunders should not go to jail for smoking marijuana. Hell, probably most of us tried the stuff when we were young." Clinton said, he said, smoking marijuana at school. Bush he tried drugs in the school. Probably half of Congress and their children took drugs one time or another. OK, weagree with you. But what about the judges. He said we can not judge the law. "
John Straun stood up. He was not a great man, but he stood very straight, and he looked very confident. He looked from one to another of them.
He said: "If you agree, then I ask you all to vote for acquittal. They are not only defending liberty Jimmy Saunders' but your own. You are fighting a tyrannical law that a judge, the power wants you to check is enforced. I told you thatmany juries, as we have in the past, the judge's instructions not observed. They have opted for freedom against a tyrannical law. Are you Americans here? What do you especially to know! Ue more, your liberty, your pride as free men, or the instructions of a judge who does not want you to judge the law, precisely because he knows you will find the law unjust? Are you with the juries who are defending our freedom in the past, or enter into this judge? "
"Here is something else to thinkover, "said John Straun with passion." What if your sister or brother in court here? Is you know that when we say Saunders guilty, the judge sent him to twenty years in prison? I understand this is Saunders third possession charge. You know the "three strikes and you're out" rule, is not it? The politicians passed a law that if a man is convicted three times for the storage, the judge has now no leeway in sentencing. Now he has the poor guy twenty years inPrison. What if your sister or brother in court? Should they go to jail for smoking marijuana, doing something that no crime should be in the first place? Do we want to send Jimmy Saunders to twenty years in prison because he was smoking a joint to hurt anyone? Can you have on your conscience? "
"You know, that almost one million people like Jimmy Saunders in prison right now, as we speak, for just this so-called" crime "of smoking marijuana ortaking other medicines? These men were sent to prison for mere possession. They harm no one but themselves if they took drugs. How can a crime without a victim? When will this horror stop? It must have an end. I ask you now, all we can to stop it here, at least for Jimmy Saunders. The only thing that can stop tyrannical laws and policies, are you and me, juries like us. If we do nothing, we have lost, is lost the land. "
"I ask you all not to bring in a guilty -Verdict, because the drug laws are unjust and a moral obscenity. I ask all of you are the kind of Americans would have been proud of our founding fathers, the same men who fought for your freedom. I ask of you all. "
John Straun sat down and looked quietly Dillard and all the others around the table. She looked at him, and it appeared that began to establish their backs, and they no longer about complaining to go home. They were quiet. Thenspoke passionately to each other.
Fifteen minutes later she walked into the room and sat in the jury. When the judge Raymond Dillard, as the verdict was that he was surprised when Dillard, standing up, saw the judge asked, said: "Not guilty." In the furious tirades of the red-faced judge who saw all quiet in the jury box at John Straun, and was proud to be Americans.
My Links : SEA Games 2009 in Vientiane Laos 25th Attorney Phoenix Dui
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น