When in court...

[Philippine Mango]

If you're part of a jury for a trial of some sort, is the jury allowed to ask questions? If they're not allowed to ask questions, how come? I would see it as a great opportunity to expose lawyers flimsy defenses or to show how baseless the prosecution's belief is.

 

[everman]

The jury can't ask the attorneys questions. I can't imagine how long some trials would last if they could... :Q

 

[HomeAppraiser]

Is the jury allowed to ask questions?

Only "How the hell did I not get out of jury duty?"

 

[Kwaipie]

Jurors in a grand jury can ask questions.

 

[n0cmonkey]

No, but you can vote on the verdict based on whether you think the law is Just or not. That's even better. 🙂

 

[HomeAppraiser]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No, but you can vote on the verdict based on whether you think the law is Just or not. That's even better. 🙂

Jury nullification!

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No, but you can vote on the verdict based on whether you think the law is Just or not. That's even better. 🙂

So if they jury votes that the law the accused 'broke' is unjust, then the accused is aquitted? What kind of trials would that apply to?

 

[SonnyDaze]

Yeah it would be a great opportunity for self pwnage for dumba$$es that think they know more than a lawyer.....:roll:

 

[HomeAppraiser]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No, but you can vote on the verdict based on whether you think the law is Just or not. That's even better. 🙂

So if they jury votes that the law the accused 'broke' is unjust, then the accused is aquitted? What kind of trials would that apply to?

Possession of an ounce or less of weed. Unless your driving or high in public, who cares it's not meth, crack or heroin.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No, but you can vote on the verdict based on whether you think the law is Just or not. That's even better. 🙂

So if they jury votes that the law the accused 'broke' is unjust, then the accused is aquitted? What kind of trials would that apply to?

Yes. Jury trials.

 

[Philippine Mango]

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze
Yeah it would be a great opportunity for self pwnage for dumba$$es that think they know more than a lawyer.....:roll:

Um, wtf?

The point would be for the jury to ask questions that the prosecution didn't think of or ideas for the defense they didn't think of either. Where is the self ownage going to occur with a question like, "Why was betty at the 7/11 at 3am?"

Crap like that..

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: SonnyDaze
Yeah it would be a great opportunity for self pwnage for dumba$$es that think they know more than a lawyer.....:roll:

Um, wtf?

The point would be for the jury to ask questions that the prosecution didn't think of or ideas for the defense they didn't think of either. Where is the self ownage going to occur with a question like, "Why was betty at the 7/11 at 3am?"

Crap like that..

When one of the lawyers kicks your ass for asking that one question he didn't want asked. 😛

 

[HomeAppraiser]

A jury member can ask the judge for clairifications on the law or jury instructions. everman is right, trials would take forever if jury members asked questions in court.

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: Philippine Mango

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No, but you can vote on the verdict based on whether you think the law is Just or not. That's even better. 🙂

So if they jury votes that the law the accused 'broke' is unjust, then the accused is aquitted? What kind of trials would that apply to?

It's called jury nullification