“Nullification” was an unknown option for Woomer jury
NewsLanc takes no position on whether Jay O’Shea Woomer administered the morphine to 11-year old Brent Weaver that resulted in his death. But we do disagree with the anonymous juror interviewed by a reporter from the Intelligencer New Era who made the following assertion:
“There were many tears, but that’s what we believed happened. It was very, very painful to follow the law. We were doing our duty and following the rules of the law.”
The jury right to say “not guilty” is an essential safeguard against injustice and special circumstances. Jury nullification dates back to English common law and the founding of the United States.
Jurors in early 19th-century America routinely refused to enforce the Alien and Sedition Act.
Jurors in mid-19th-century America widely rejected the Fugitive Slave Act.
Jurors in the early 20th-century America refused to enforce Alcohol Prohibition.
District attorneys and judges despise the notion and never mention the option to jurors or allow the defense to bring it up but, under our rule of law, deciding on guilt and innocence is strictly the province of the jury. Their decision is beyond question.
Perhaps the judge will find a way to do some “nullification” on his own concerning sentencing.
