170
submitted 1 month ago by grue@lemmy.world to c/uk_politics@feddit.uk
all 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Hegar@fedia.io 53 points 1 month ago

In order to be able to appeal directly to the jury, the actionists then represented themselves in court and reminded the jury members of their right to acquit as a matter of conscience, regardless of legal argument.

This led to a hung jury. The state is expected to continue to pursue a conviction, with a retrial likely in February 2026. Palestine Action said this would create “another opportunity to expose who the real criminals are”.

The state didn't get the result they wanted so they're just doing it again. That's cool. Much legitimate, very justice.

[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

mistrials usually lead to a new trial.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago

I'm neither a UK person nor a Palestinian activist, but I found this to be an interesting example of how freedom of speech and jury nullification (or "jury equity," apparently) work in the UK.

[-] holycrap@lemm.ee 9 points 1 month ago

I didn't realize they had an equivalent in the uk

[-] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 month ago

Jury nullification isn't a real thing. It's not a law in any country, it's a "loophole" that springs out from some simple concepts.

  1. You have a right to a trial by a jury of your peers, jurors are protected from consequences related to their deliberation and decisions.
  2. If found "not guilty" the state cannot retry you for the same crime.

Both of those things are important to avoid tyranny in the judicial system.

What that means is that if, for any reason, the jury decides to find you "not guilty" even against their "jury instructions" or the law itself, you're off the hook forever. This concept is called "jury nullification" but it's not a law or "feature" of the justice system. In fact most of the time it's been used for very unjust outcomes, for example juries often refused to find people who perpetrated lynchings guilty because a "jury of your peers" in many states was racist AF!

That being said I LOVE to see it used to refuse unjust laws!

[-] holycrap@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

Thanks, that makes sense. The internet creates a skewed perspective on shit like this.

[-] lemmyseizethemeans@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 month ago

Imagine if America had a functional judicial system

this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2024
170 points (97.8% liked)

UK Politics

3066 readers
54 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS