I can really only see myself considering jury nullification in the cases of felony murder. Take for example the Elkhart 4 case, where 4 kids broke into a house, a 5th one backed out and sat on a porch, they didn't steal anything, they fled when they saw the owner who then shot one of them to death, and they were all convicted of Felony Murder somehow and sentenced to 45-55 years in prison. 55 years in prison for breaking into a house. The homeowner should have been the one brought up on murder charges, you don't shoot someone who's running away from you.
Wow, that's a ridiculous case. Only in a FUBAR world do they each get half a century while George Zimmerman is free.
Yeah that's felony murder for you. If
anyone dies during a felony that you commit, it's treated as if you murdered them. I remember reading a similar case in law school: Two guys break into a house. The police show up. One of them surrenders. The other resists arrest and ends up getting shot and killed by a cop. The other robber gets convicted of felony murder.
As for jury nullification, yes, juries of course have that right. But no, they shouldn't be instructed of that fact because it sort of only works if you don't talk about it.
