Even if jury nullification is accepted as "wrong", isn't the State at fault?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It seems to me that even if one opposes jury nullification, any blame for it should be placed at the feet of the state and the system, not anyone who follows their conscience.

Let's take the following scenario: Joe Smith is a pretty normal guy and generally law-abiding. He doesn't do illegal drugs, even marijuana, but he has a couple friends that do. He considers it a bad habit and waste of time, but doesn't think that there is any reason compelling reason for marijuana to be illegal that justifies the costs of this, but thinks that people arrested and charged with it don't really have anyone besides themselves to blame, though he is quite sympathetic to those who end up with stiff sentences instead of the slap on the wrist ones given to people charged with only possession in states where its decriminalized.

Joe ends up getting called for jury duty. During the screening process he makes his views above pretty clear and explains he probably would be uncomfortable ending up any jury in a marijuana case though he'll try to uphold the law in whatever case he may end up on. He ends up on a jury of a young man charged with sale of marijuana. The defendant is obviously guilty, but seems like a pretty harmless guy and quite intelligent. He also plans on going to college, which Joe knows will become far far more difficult with the conviction and sentenced jail time. The defendant was a small time dealer and overall a good kid who ended up with some of the wrong crowd. Joe decides he can't in good conscience carry out such a sentence, so he deadlocks the jury and it hangs.

It seems to me that the primary wrong here was those responsible for pre-screening for not removing someone like Joe from the jury pool. It's quite immoral to ask anyone in my view to take an action like that that would weigh so heavily on their conscience, and if they are, they shouldn't be faulted for "failing" at their view.

"New" BRTD has pretty much the same position on jury nullification as I used, but my reasoning has changed a bit, it's no longer "people who break laws I disagree with and do things I like are awesome and don't deserve to be punished" (though as stated my views on most moral issues haven't really changed much, and I don't have a problem personally with marijuana, or private and truly consensual prostitution) but rather that if a law is unjust and a person can receive unjust punishment even if it is for an act I find wrong (this is how I feel about many DUI laws for instance) then my obligation to God and my fellow man outweighs that of any "obligation" to the state and I won't carry out the latter. If the state seriously has a problem with that, then they have the obligation to make sure that I don't end up in the position where I could be forced to make that choice.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Is the example you mentioned above, if the judge didn't strike Joe from the jury pool on her own, I'd expect the prosecution to use one of their strikes on him.

In any case, I don't think your examples are valid uses of jury nullification.  I see it as a tool to be used when one of the following circumstances applies, or other similar circumstances:

1) The prosecution is engaging in some novel theories to apply criminal laws in ways they were not intended to be used.  Example: Charging a pregnant mother who uses drugs with distribution of illicit substances to a minor (i.e., her unborn child).

2) The prosecution is applying a law that hasn't been used in some time and which would likely be struck from the books if the legislature knew it was still there.  Example: Charging a South Carolina juvenile with playing a pinball machine. (SC Code 63-19-2430)

[Badger]

Nope jury nullification is wrong. There are arguable legal remedies to the situations Ernest poses.

Remember, jury nullification can cut both ways. A jury could ignore the instruction for reasonable doubt or a technical defense and convict because (e.g.) the defendant was involved with someone outside their race or was an unpopular religious minority.

Don't like the law, go to the legislature.

[bullmoose88]

^^Typical Prosecutor.