Decision on DUI frustrates officials

[Samson]

“If an intoxicated person starts his vehicle that is not, in and of itself, enough for an officer to have probable cause to believe a driver is under the influence,” Webby said. “They (the courts) don’t want to put a chilling effect on people who know they can’t drive and are using a car to sleep.”

Thoughts on the change USMB?

I hate interrupting the thread once its gone 4 pages and has transformed topicality, BUT:

Why even bother arresting the guy for DUI? Why not just arrest him for PI?

The point is, the law should have a chilling effect on BEING INTOXICATED. or, we should promote drunks sleeping it off in cars. Where are the Billboards suggesting:

Don't Drink and Drive: Sleep it Off in Your Car!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is a correct statement of the law and a correct statement of what happens in real life in actual courtrooms.

You are absolutely correct. That does not change the fact that jury nullification is part of our system of law, and the only real power citizens have to negate laws that are wrong. Suffering under laws until the courts or legislature gets their act together is a form of tyranny, which is why we have a jury to decide criminal cases.

QW, I believe in jury nullification. My wife does not, as a matter of law of course it's done, but it's not allowed. If caught you will be tossed and cited for contempt.

That is because contempt of court is an arbitrary power given to judges, but it is not a criminal charge.

 

[ConHog]

You are absolutely correct. That does not change the fact that jury nullification is part of our system of law, and the only real power citizens have to negate laws that are wrong. Suffering under laws until the courts or legislature gets their act together is a form of tyranny, which is why we have a jury to decide criminal cases.

QW, I believe in jury nullification. My wife does not, as a matter of law of course it's done, but it's not allowed. If caught you will be tossed and cited for contempt.

That is because contempt of court is an arbitrary power given to judges, but it is not a criminal charge.

I never said criminal, I said civil crime.

 

[George Costanza]

You are absolutely correct. That does not change the fact that jury nullification is part of our system of law, and the only real power citizens have to negate laws that are wrong. Suffering under laws until the courts or legislature gets their act together is a form of tyranny, which is why we have a jury to decide criminal cases.

QW, I believe in jury nullification. My wife does not, as a matter of law of course it's done, but it's not allowed. If caught you will be tossed and cited for contempt.

That is because contempt of court is an arbitrary power given to judges, but it is not a criminal charge.

It is not a criminal charge in the sense that there is a statute that describes it and prescribes a punishment for it. But it most definitely is a criminal charge in the sense that a person can be imprisoned for it.

 

[George Costanza]

A judge can absolutely remove a juror if he suspects jury nullification. He can further charge you with contempt of court if you willfully ignore his instructions. You are NOT allowed to say "I don't like this law, so I'm voting not guilty." That's ridiculous.

This is a correct statement of the law and a correct statement of what happens in real life in actual courtrooms.

You are absolutely correct. That does not change the fact that jury nullification is part of our system of law, and the only real power citizens have to negate laws that are wrong. Suffering under laws until the courts or legislature gets their act together is a form of tyranny, which is why we have a jury to decide criminal cases.

While it is true that jury nullification was considered a valid function of a jury at the time of inception of the jury system, that is no longer true. Today, a juror who engages in the practice will be dismissed from the jury and replaced with another juror. Wiki says:

Modern American jurisprudence is generally intolerant of the practice, and a juror can be removed from a case if the judge believes that the juror is aware of the power of nullification.