This week in jury history, we mark the anniversaries of two cases in which jurors weighed in with not guilty verdicts for people who were peacefully exercising their right to keep and bear arms.
On 13 January 2009, jurors found marine veteran and double-amputee Melroy Cort not guilty on two felony counts related to possession of a pistol.
Cort had vacated his house in Ohio and was on the way to Walter Reed Army Medical Center for an extended stay. Before he left, he asked his commanding officer what to do with the weapon and was advised to bring it with him and, on his arrival, check it at the armory.
En route to the facility, his vehicle had a flat tire and someone called police when they saw him remove the firearm from the car for safekeeping while the car was in someone else's care at a repair shop.
Click through to FIJA's case file to learn what was at stake and how Cort convinced a jury to find him not guilty of two felonies:
On 16 January 2015, a Detroit jury found open carry activist Elijah Woody not guilty of a felony charge for carrying a concealed weapon.
Police claimed that Woody's firearm was obscured from view by a puffy coat he was wearing that had allegedly flopped over the weapon. According to a statement from one of Woody's defense attorneys, the video showed this to be a lie.
Learn more about Woody's acquittal in FIJA's case file:
Because jurors' reason for their vote usually does not make it into media reports, it's not always straightforward to identify cases of jury nullification.
Of the above two cases, I categorize Melroy Cort's as a likely case of jury nullification. Without seeing the video in the Elijah Woody case, I would describe it as a possible case of jury nullification.
Whether or not these were conscientious acquittals, however, it seems clear from reports in both cases that the judgement of an independent jury of fellow citizens rather than power hungry government officials was critical in delivering these not guilty verdicts.
