• Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      159
      ·
      2 days ago

      You mean that very legal and factually-suppprted facet of the American justice system that every juror should be informed about before making a decision in court?

    • plz1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      2 days ago

      They revised mod policy to only hand out bans/deletions if jury nullification was referenced as a cause to vilence, not a reaction o past events. I’m paraphrasing, of course.

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yeah, basically

        “Go do [Violence] and we’ll do jury nullification afterwards” is bad, bur

        “[Violence happened], but it was justified in the eyes of the majority of people so jury Nullification should happen”

        Is OK

        • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          2 days ago

          I think that message was a sort of sarcastic way of getting around a “dont talk about jury nullification” rule, in that saying “we cant talk about x”, while making it very clear what x is, prompts people unfamiliar with x to go look it up

        • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Because the refusal to convict someone based on laws and circumstances you feel are unjust is wrong and goes against everything the ruling class have fought for.

          • winterayars@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            But if also a cornerstone. (For better and worse–it got and still gets used to excuse people who commit hate crimes, for example.)

            • Stovetop@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 days ago

              The “good ol’ boy” excuse.

              • “He’s got a promising life ahead of him!”

              • “It’s just how things are done, that ain’t his fault!”

              • “He just didn’t know any better!”

              • “We’ve all done stupid things before, who are we to judge?”

              • “He’s a pillar of the community, think of all the good he’s done!”

    • jeffw@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      To clarify, the admins have updated their views in reaction to this week and user feedback:

      Following a discussion in our team we want to clarify that we are no longer requesting moderators to remove content relating to jury nullification in the context of violent crimes when the crime in question already happened. We will still consider suggestions of jury nullification for crimes that have not (yet) happened as advocation for violence, which is violating our terms of service.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The policy was cleared up, basically EU/Dutch/Finnish law doesn’t like Jury Nullification in regards to future crimes/calls to violence. But in regards to crimes already committed it’s fine. And being as that’s where .world is hosted, that’s the law they go by.

        • flicker@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 days ago

          Switched to dbzer0 straight after seeing a mod try and justify the censorship of this topic by saying something along the lines of “only God can judge.”

          Now I get to enjoy aaaall the content world has defederated from.