Can a judge accused of treason give a verdict before the treason charge is decided?


If a judge fails to inform a jury of the power of jury nullification, is that treason?
I believe in jury nullification.

It's an ancient power that predates the United States but it's inexorably woven into our freedoms. Juries have the power to judge not only the accused but the law. Judges and prosecutors today purposely do not tell jurors of this power.

If a jury finds the law unjust, they can refuse to convict. No judge is empowered to tell them otherwise. It's the last bastion of freedom from tyranny, and the specific reason why you are guaranteed a jury your peers. It's the ultimate check on oppressive government power. Even if the face of overwhelming evidence against the accused, a jury must also rule on the law.

If you don't know about it, a good place to start is the Fully Informed Jury Association.

Any American judge who tells you that juries are not empowered to judge the law is lying. From John Peter Zenger to verdicts against the Fugitive Slave Law to the American Labor movement, it's been a vital part of our liberty. Yes, it has been abused. But it is also the strongest defense American citizens have.

Recently one of my more underground liberty lists was discussing some possible last ditch efforts to derail an out of control state. And even though I am a paranoid semi-hermit, I'm probably the most "open" about my politics elsewhere on the net.

So when I saw this Sunni and the Conspirators entry about Pete Hendrickson, I put up this reply.

There has been some speculation in another of my freedom groups that there is a way to stop at least one judge and gum up one trial. I don't know if it has actually been tried, and in my mind it is as risky as possible. Realistically it probably wouldn't do anything except delay matters a bit.

Accuse the judge of high treason against the Constitution.

Now I'm not a lawyer, but supposedly that is the one crime that must be heard and settled before a judge can rule again. The specifics of the treason case would insure that the power of jury nullification would not be swept under the rug.

I sure as blazes wouldn't do it unless it were the absolute last chance. At best I can't see it being anything other than a sacrificial gambit.

Since I probably do have the highest public profile as a small "L" libertarian at the underground liberty list, I want to throw the idea out there and get some answers.

Can a judge accused of treason give a verdict before the treason charge is decided?

If a judge fails to inform a jury that they have the power to decide the law as well as the guilt of the accused, is that treason?

I know what I think, but I would love to get some definitive answers from other people.

Any takers?

— NeoWayland

Posted: Wed - October 28, 2009 at 03:13 PM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved