WASHINGTON POST / AP: The following excerpts are from “Snowden trial could be awkward for US“:
“…[Edward Snowden] would no doubt bring First Amendment defenses to what he did, emphasizing the public interest in his disclosures and the democratic values that he served,” said David Pozen, a Columbia Law School professor and a former legal adviser at the State Department.
“There’s been no case quite like it.…
“A November Washington Post/ABC News poll found 52 percent of Americans supported charging Snowden with a crime, while 38 percent opposed it.
“The Justice Department breaks those alleged misdeeds into three charges filed in federal court in Virginia: theft of government property; under the Espionage Act, the unauthorized communication of national defense information; and willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person
“Escaping conviction would be difficult… “ (more)
We think otherwise. With 38 percent opposing charging Snowden with a crime, an age old but seldom discussed jury right since the Magna Carta in 1215 might be evoked: Nullification.
“Jury nullification occurs in a trial when a jury acquits a defendant they believe to be guilty of the charges against them. This may occur when members of the jury disagree with the law the defendant has been charged with breaking, or believe that the law should not be applied in that particular case.”
“Jury nullification is the source of much debate. Some maintain that it is an important safeguard of last resort against wrongful imprisonment and government tyranny. Others view it as a violation of the right to a jury trial that undermines the law.”
An example: “Jury nullification’ was practiced in the 1850s to protest the federal Fugitive Slave Act, which was part of the Compromise of 1850.”
More recently, federal prosecutors have found some juries unwilling to convict for minor drug violations, regardless of the evidence.
Judge and prosecutors may scream bloody murder, but nullification is a jury’s option when one or more members believe special circumstances make prevailing law inconsistent with justice.
Jury nullification and the necessity defense are two methods of righting wrongs. It’s important to remember that judges and prosecutors draw their pay from the same paymaster. It’s also important to remember that with thousands of laws on the books, how easy it is to unknowingly break a law and that the cost of defending ones self is prohibitively high.
If you add in the fact that one may be charged with multiple counts one could be looking at many years in prison for relatively minor offenses. The net effect is guilty pleas; not because one is guilty, but because the alternative is too risky.