To view this email online, paste this link into your browser:
[link removed]





Four Link Friday!

Good afternoon John,

Happy New Year!

We're off to a big start this year—so big that I'm adding an extra link this week. And to maintain alliterative integrity in the title of this email, I have opted for a Four Link Friday this week instead of a Three Link Thursday.

Actually, I held this email up because I wanted to squeeze in one more thing that just got worked out into this week's email—I've got TWO new FIJA offerings in the mix. And okay, technically there is an extra link embedded in the first link description, but I hope you will let me slide on that!

1

First Possible Jury Nullification Case of 2022 ([link removed]) ([link removed])

I don't think I've ever seen the first possible case of jury nullification this early in any year I've been working with FIJA. That may have happened on Wednesday in the city of Bristol in England.

Four protesters opted for a trial by jury rather than to have their case decided by a magistrate. They were charged wtih criminal damage of a public statue of slave trader and philanthropist Edward Colston, whose significant contributions to the city were largely made possible by his profit from his involvement in the Royal African Company, which took roughly 80,000 men, women, and children from Africa and sold them as slaves.

I label this a possible case of jury nullificaton rather than likely (as I had originally tweeted a couple of days ago) because of this legal analysis explaining a bit about English law ([link removed]) that is not something most of us in the United States are familiar with.

Some of you may find yourself applauding the jury's verdicts in this case. Others may be outraged. No need to email me with your opinion of whether or not the jury did the right thing. I already know from the internet that many people disagree with the verdict.

I will just point out that if you find yourself with mixed feelings or strong opposition to this verdict... things like this are part the deal with juries and jury nullification. 

We are all going to disagree with some juries' decisions sometimes. We are all going to disagree with some jurors' exercise of conscientious acquittal at least sometimes. 

Yet these are crucial safeguards, not only in spite of our disagreements, but I would say because of them. To me that is part of the beauty of the jury system as it was intended. It is designed to err disproportionately in favor of the accused. A properly functioning jury system only allows the government to punish someone accused of a crime with widespread agreement of a jury that serves as the conscience of the community.

2

2022 State of the American Jury System ([link removed])

What is getting better in the American jury system? What is getting worse?

In last year's inaugural State of the American Jury System presentation, we established a baseline on the state of the American jury system. It was not great, to put it mildly—especially in light of measures imposed by government during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our knowledgeable panelists will update you in:

FIJA's second annual 
State of the American Jury System presentation on
19 January 2022 at
noon Eastern / 11:00 am Central
10:00 am Mountain / 9:00 am Pacific

I currently anticipate this will be presented as a Zoom webinar and simultaneously livestreamed to FIJA's official Facebook page. If I get very brave, we may also livestream to our YouTube channel at the same time on an experimental basis. 

Register on or before 18 January 2022 to join us on Zoom. If you are joining us on Facebook (or if you want to take your chances with YouTube, which I remind you may not work out), there is no need to register.

Registrants should expect an email during the week before the presentation with the information you need to join the webinar. I will also be sending reminder emails the day before and the morning of the presentation. The presentation will be recorded and posted to YouTube (assuming nothing goes wrong!) afterward, and I will send a link to all registrants as soon as it is available on YouTube.

3

The Jury Is Out... ([link removed])

Can you help educate the public by doing a little information bounty hunting of sorts?  There are a number of jury-related questions for which we can find no definitive answer or for which the answer may change at any time.

For instance, do you know what is the longest length of time an American citizen has been held in pre-trial detention without being convicted? No? Me neither. The various government systems in the United States generally do not make that kind of data readily available to the public, let alone aggregated across all levels of government.

This year, though, we're going to try and put our collective wisdom and observations together to answer some of these kinds of questions. See, for example, the case I'm sharing with you in the fourth link this week, which is a great example of what might be submitted in answer to the pre-trial detention question.

Even though we can't definitively answer these questions without an exhaustive inventory of all U.S. trial records, we can at least share with the public the most egregious examples of these types of abuses that we know of by pooling our observations.

Click through ([link removed]) to learn how you can contribute to this project and possibly score some FIJA swag in the process!

4

Kidnap Victim Released After Nine Years Seeks Accountability ([link removed]) ([link removed])

What would you call it if a stranger kidnapped you and imprisoned you for NINE YEARS? A horrific crime? Why is it called something different when the government does it?

Emanuel Fair was imprisoned for NINE YEARS WITHOUT CONVICTION, mostly in solitary confinement. His physical imprisonment ended after a jury ultimateley found him not guilty, but his ordeal continues to this day. This is one of the most egregious "speedy" trial abuses I am aware of for an American citizen imprisoned by American government officials.

I have really harped on the issue of speedy trial violations since around the start of the pandemic, but this case clearly demonstrates that such injustices have a long history before that. While this case was itself not a jury nullification case, we should keep in mind that the speedy trial problem affects all kinds of cases—many of which fully informed jurors would consider for conscientious acquittal. But without trial by jury, there is no jury nullification.

And with that, I will wrap up Four Link Friday. Thanks for sticking with me to the end of this email, and have a great weekend!

For Liberty, Justice, and Peace in Our Lifetimes,

Kirsten C. Tynan
Executive Director
Fully Informed Jury Association





P.O. Box 5570 | Helena, MT 59858 US

This email was sent to [email protected].
To ensure that you continue receiving our emails,
please add us to your address book or safe list.

manage your preferences ([link removed])
opt out ([link removed]) using TrueRemove(r).

Got this as a forward? Sign up ([link removed]) to receive our future emails.