This is a genuine question.
I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.
And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.
Jury nullification exists precisely because there is often a gap between legality and justice. It’s a way for the commoners to ensure justice when the nobility (CEOs and rich politicians, nowadays) make the laws in ways that exploit the commoners. It’s not so much about law vs. feelings as much as it is about offsetting the power of the powerful.
Double edge sword tho. Its also how Klan memberrs walk innocence from court. Hope he does not get caught tho.
True, but we aren’t talking about whether jury nullification should exist. It already does exist and has for a 1000 years. The question is just when to use it. Like any right or privilege, it can be used unjustly. It is up to citizens to make sure it is used for good.
For sure
