The Jury Nullification Bill, SB924, died in committee.
However, we plan to resurrect it next year. It will be brought back in the short session in 2018.
Thank you all for the support.
Hey Folks, The Jury Nullification Bill, SB924, died in committee. However, we plan to resurrect it next year. It will be brought back in the short session in 2018. Thank you all for the support. The Sustainable Energy Ordinance Violates the Right to Commerce Since the first time cavemen traded bones for beads humans have participated in the most basic ritual of shopping the marketplace commonly referred to as the Right to Commerce. Preceding any government or religion, the market is an organic element existing because we exist surviving on the unique trait of adaptability, not the artificial illusion of sustainability. Currently, there is an effort by a group of rabid environmentalist to deny people this right by democratizing trade and allowing voters the power to dictate over who can and cannot buy and sell products to willing consumers. It is a threat to liberty looming over Coos County in the form of an ordinance titled, Establishing a Community Bill of Rights Providing for a Sustainable Energy Future, or Measure 6-162, which will be on the May ballot in a countywide election. Measure 6-162 is supposed to be the silver bullet that will kill the LNG project in Coos Bay, but the people promoting this tyranny by the majority have stated that their end goal is to eliminate all use of fossil fuels and replace those affordable, dependable energy sources with more costly and unproven experimental alternatives. The bill will also impose new draconian regulations that will limit growth potential through the hindrance of private ownership to the point of crippling the economy. In an effort to find fuel smugglers or to detect illegal infractions, the local government will have to establish checkpoints on its borders, stifling traffic and free travel. The process will make it more difficult and more expensive to heat houses and businesses or simply fill-up a car, effectively closing down the county. The nihilistic sponsors of the bill have even stated that, “if a town goes bankrupt trying to defend one of our ordinances, well, perhaps that’s exactly what is needed to trigger a national movement,” which shows a cruel indifference towards the very people they claim to be helping. It also demonstrates the group’s blind faith adherence to a radical ideology even when those beliefs are detrimental to their fellow citizens. It is the height of irrationality. The people of Coos have a chance to retain sanity by rejecting the idea that a vote can eliminate a right. More importantly, its defeat will send a message to the anticapitalistic crowd who may use this same initiative to try to destroy the economy of other Oregon counties. Oppose the regression of society and Vote NO on Measure 6-162 before the extremists relegate the community back to the Stone Age. About the author: Rob Taylor is the founder of a virtual network of local activist at CoosCountyWatchdog.com, and a chief petitioner for the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance.
Original Filing of Measure 6-162 March 14, 2017 The Oregon Jury Nullification Bill Throughout the history of western civilization, there is a legal concept wherein individual jurors or an entire jury will either forgo and set aside the evidence as presented or the instructions given to them by the judge, or both and reach a verdict based on their own conscience. It comes from a sanctioned doctrine subscribing that jurors are the judges of the facts, the law, and the moral imperative. Oregon is unique in the sense of already having a state constitution that enumerates this exalted tradition of jury discretion. The sixteenth amendment states that, “In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law, and the facts under the direction of the Court as to the law, and the right of new trial, as in civil cases,” which should be fully disclosed to every jury at every trial to ensure their impartiality. Since this is presently not the case, State Senator Kim Thatcher recently introduced a bill, SB924, which would interject wording pertaining to jury discretion into the jury instructions. The bill states that, “As jurors, if you feel that a conviction would not be a fair or just result in this case, it is within your power to find the defendant not guilty even if you find that the state has proven the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” Many legal experts, including Constitutional Attorney KrisAnne Hall and Professor Roger Roots PhD, are confident that adding this single sentence, or a similar statement to the jury instructions in every courtroom is one lawful remedy to level an imbalance that is absent in the Judicial Branch of government today. In Oregon, it would help restore the dwindling confidence and pride in the state’s legal system. The Sixth Amendment espouses that every individual has a right to an impartial jury. The impartiality of a juror will always be in question unless they are knowingly informed of the jury’s “power to acquit” and “right to nullify” even if guilt of the defendant is proven beyond reasonable doubt. The only way for a defendant to have absolute knowledge that a jury of their peers is aware of this inherent authority is if the Judge in their case explains this right to the jury from the jury instructions before deliberations. The term for this authority is “Jury Nullification,” which does not actually invalidate any law. It just nullifies the law in a particular case at the jury’s discretion. The court system has been overlooking the jury’s “power to acquit” and the “right to nullify” to the point of nonexistence. Many times during US history, precedence has been set allowing the jury to find a defendant innocent, even when the decision was clearly contradictory to the law. Yet today many Judges tell the juries that there is no such right. In some cases, judges have rejected jurors from the jury panel due to their intent to nullify the law, and the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit validated this practice in a decision made in 1997. Consider this, before every interrogation of a suspect, an officer is supposed to read that person their Miranda Rights to afford them the opportunity of making an objective decision pertaining to their legal situation. More importantly, it reiterates the fact that for the record the suspect was knowingly aware of their rights thus preserving the admissibility of their statements against them in criminal proceedings, which could possibly prevent the government losing the case on appeal. Now extend that theory of acknowledgement to a jury. A jurist that is unaware of their legal authority and individual rights, the “power to acquit” and the “right to nullify,” would automatically be partial to the prosecution’s position in any trial due to this omission, thereby abolishing the defendant’s ability to receive an unbiased verdict by an impartial jury of their peers. The Fifth Amendment states, “nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb,” which establishes double jeopardy protections. During the colonial era, the king would prosecute revolutionary colonists repeatedly until the royal court found them guilty. The Founding Fathers were accustomed to this legal treachery and it is the reason why they held trial by jury as a very revered institution, and that the decision made by the jury was final, no matter what the court may have proven. Jury discretion was and still is one of the few mechanisms a free society utilizes to keep the chains on unrestrained government. Unfortunately, the US court system currently operates on the assumption that individuals on a jury may or may not be aware of their rights as a jurist and for Judges and Prosecutors ignorance is bliss, but for defendants it is a dangerous bias. In many other jurisdictions, the jury instructions have gone from “may” convict to “must” convict when the prosecution proves that a defendant is guilty of breaking a law, which eliminates any chance for a jury to use their own discretionary authority and common sense when deliberating a case. The ingrained system for both the federal and state courts are not going to exert any effort in explaining to prospective jurors of their legitimate duty, because it benefits the government’s ability for an easy conviction. The Legislature will have to initiate change to reform this systemic failure of the Judiciary. Federal and state lawmakers will have to write new laws to compel the courts to inform the jury of their duties and rights by passing legislation that will forcibly insert that information into the jury instructions and compel the Judges to read those instructions before deliberations, or suffer the specified consequences. Click the following link to find out more information on SB924 the Oregon Jury Nullification Bill. www.facebook.com/oregonjurynullificationlaw & www.CoosCountyWatchdog.com Keep track of the bill on OLIS at https://olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2017R1/Measures/Overview/SB924. About the author: Rob Taylor is the founder of a virtual network of local activist at CoosCountyWatchdog.com, and a chief petitioner for the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance. Related Posts: |
All
A.F.P.
Agenda 21
Bandon
B.I.A.
B.L.M.
Coos Bay
Coos County
Coos County
Coquille
County Charter
Curry County
C.W.A.
Democratic Party
D.E.Q.
Eco Devo
Eco Devo
Economic Development
Educational
Elections
E.P.A.
F.D.A.
F.E.M.A.
Individual Rights
I Spy Radio
Jury Nullification
Legislation
Letter To Editor
Mary Geddry
N.D.A.A.
News Wave
N.O.A.A.
North Bend
O&C Land
O.D.F.W.
O.D.O.T.
O.F.F.
O.H.A.
O.P.R.D.
O.R.C. Mining
O.W.E.B.
P.E.R.S.
Petitions
Port Of Coos Bay
Public Comments
Public Events
Regulation
Republican Party
S.A.O.V.A.
State Of Jefferson
The Bandon Marsh
The Economy
The Rob Taylor Report
The Supreme Court
The Tea Party
Urban Renewal
U.S.A.C.E.
U.S.D.A.
U.S.F.S
U.S.F.W.S.
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011