What is “jury nullification?”
After the “not guilty” verdict was rendered by the jury in the Michael Sussmann trial in Washington, D. C. last week, we immediately began to hear the term “jury nullification.” For more, see our previous post, Wednesday, June 1 “Clinton lawyer Sussman found not guilty! Trump Responds.”
(Stock photo of a jury box. Fourteen chairs because there are 12 jurors and two alternates.)
Many BM (Babylonian Media—fake news) talking heads and other supposed experts on the judicial system immediately declared that the shocking verdict was a result of jury nullification. Shocking because it was such a slam-dunk case that Sussmann was clearly guilty. How could the jury unanimously find him “not guilty?”
Sadly, even our compatriot, Praying Medic (Dave Hayes), in his rundown of the latest @q posts on TruthSocial used the Babylonian legal system, by which the Mystery Babylonians control the conversation, by quoting from the Cornell University law school concerning what constituted jury nullification and its validity, or lack thereof.
(We are not imputing bad motives to Dave, nor throwing him under the bus. We are simply pointing out a mistake, in our view. Dave does much good work in analyzing the @q posts and we will continue to follow his work in that regard.)
Did you expect the whole truth from Cornell law school? Sorry to disappoint if you did. Our readers know better than to expect truth from our Babylonian system which looks out for its own—until they are no longer useful.
At which point, the Mystery Babylonians sacrifice their own—after all, they are a diabolical and demonic cult! The modern term for a non-fatal sacrifice is that they “throw (somebody—fill in the blank) under the bus.” Notice how the BM are now in the process of throwing Joe Biden (or whoever he is) under the bus.
There is a much better source for learning the critical importance and value of jury nullification. We will give you the link below. But let us provide a primer for you.
The following comes from the Freedom Calendar’s centerfold. We offered this calendar to our readers every year for perhaps two decades before the death last year of its author and publisher, Dan Pilla, who was a long-time personal friend of mine.
Dan used ten of the twelve calendar months to explain the first ten amendments to our Constitution. After the month of June each year, wherein he explained the sixth amendment—our right to a trial by a jury of our peers—he used the centerfold to explain the right of jury nullification.
The following is Dan’s explanation, modified slightly by me. Wherever Dan had red font for emphasis, we have used boldface type. QUOTE:
Let us speak for a moment about two of the most widely known forms of government: a democracy and a republic. One of the differences between a democracy and a republic is that a democracy is a one-vote-system and a republic is a (relatively) safe three-vote-system.
The chief safeguard of the republic’s three-vote-system is known as “jury nullification.”
Our forefathers gave us a republic, not a democracy. When we pledge to the flag, it is to the “republic for which it stands,” not to a democracy. The three votes that make a republic so strong are as follows:
- The Election Poll is our weakest vote;
- The Grand Jury is the mechanism allowing the citizens to indict politicians and government employees who fail to follow the Constitution or commit other crimes against the people, and also for other crimes by citizens;
- The Jury is our most powerful and protective vote. It is a true safety net.
The jury was given the most responsible vote in the nation. This vote is the liberty to maintain all other liberties. It was given to the humblest of citizens. Congress may pass a law, the President may approve and sign a law, the courts may rule on a law, but only the Jury is entrusted with the power to enforce the law. This gives profound meaning to the phrase “We the people.”
One humble man on a jury has more power than Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President combined, because that one juror has the right to nullify any law that is unjust simply by voting “not guilty.” This veto power is jury nullification.
In 1797, in the early days of our nation, this power was expressed by the Congress of the United States in law and was approved and signed (1798) by the 2nd President of the United States, John Adams.
Congress passed four laws, known as the Alien and Sedition Acts. It is in part four, The Sedition Act, that the real fireworks are contained. It is not the act itself we want to focus on, since the act itself was to be temporary, to end in 1801.
It is the inclusion of jury nullification, the liberty to maintain all other liberties, in the body of the law, that makes this act very important. By 1798, when this act was signed into law, jury nullification was already the accepted Right, Authority, Power and Duty of the jury.
In the 1800s, slaves were set free by this same doctrine of jury nullification. Jurors do have the Right, Authority, Power and Duty to nullify unjust and bad laws.
Although the Alien And Sedition Acts have ended, jury nullification has not. The two most important procedural legal parts of The Sedition Act are as stated: (1) “…the truth of the matter contained in the publication charged as libel…” may be given in court; (2) “And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact under the direction of the court as in other cases.”
In other words, the Judge is to instruct the Jury about this right. Additionally, it should be noted that the right of jury nullification was now extended to alien immigrants and refugees [who came into this country legally, by the way!]. This was a generous and bold move.
Jury nullification is the highest governmental right in the land to protect citizens both from bad governmental laws and oppressions as well as acts from unjust citizens.
Jury nullification makes it possible to settle disputes in the courtroom peacefully. If this right could be extended graciously to aliens, certainly then, Americans should never give up this right in their courtrooms. END QUOTE
For a veritable wealth of information and resources regarding the issue of jury nullification and related material, visit the website of the Fully Informed Jury Association.
Consider this as part of our duties as citizens—Continuing Ed. for Understanding our Constitution.
Back to the Sussmann verdict… Did not Special Prosecutor Durham know what might happen in D. C.? That 96% or so of the voters in D. C. are Democrats. Of course, Durham knew.
But the mission was accomplished. Facts came to light under sworn testimony in public which can then be used as authoritative when it comes to trials (probably in the form of military tribunals) of bigger fish who will be tried for much greater crimes than lying to the (corrupt) FBI.
It also brought the term “jury nullification” into the public consciousness, albeit in a perverted and upside-down manner—but what would we expect from the District of Corruption?
I, myself, was well-acquainted with our power of jury nullification when I was called to serve on a jury in Palm Beach County, Florida in the mid-1980s. I had no good reason to be excused, and thus I ended up losing six weeks of time from Bruggeman Construction to serve on that jury.
Fortunately, my brother and co-founder was able to handle my duties as well as his own for those six weeks—great job, JR!
The trial was a high profile case: two men accused of a triple homicide crime spree. It was all over the local media at the time, but of course, we were told not to read, view, or listen to any of it before we rendered a verdict—to which instruction I faithfully adhered.
Even back then I understood the BM-fake news propaganda, having been anachronistically “red-pilled” in 1976. Once the cases were presented and it went to the jury, we were sequestered until we reached a unanimous verdict. I was elected foreman of the jury.
It took a while to come to unanimous agreement, but we found them both guilty of first-degree murder on all three counts. Our jury was composed of about equal numbers of men and women and a mixture of races/ethnicities.
There was no need to consider our power of jury nullification in the murder cases, so I do not recall that I even broached the subject behind closed doors.
The jury in the Sussmann case used the power of jury nullification to “protect their own.” Now it is up to the right-thinking, God-fearing people of this nation to study and act and add jury nullification into our armory of tools.
And before some ill-informed reader wants to accuse me of relying on the “arm of flesh,” we are fully aware of the fact that this is a spiritual battle, and that we put on the whole armor of God found in Ephesians 6, and “the battle is the Lord’s,” and all those similar and true biblical concepts.
But to conclude that we need do nothing is pure foolishness and/or laziness. We can point to countless incidents in Scripture (and we have done so in many of our lengthy series of Bible studies—The Character of Saul and David series comes immediately to mind) where Godly men showed their faith by their works (James 2:18-20) —they went into physical battle relying fully by faith on our God!
Let us then not be weary in well-doing. Let’s awaken and get to work, spiritually and physically!
-END-