Yeah, that’s a good point. It can definitely hurt.
Hoping for jury nullification is an extremely risky strategy in of itself.
But isn’t this exactly what these institutions were designed to do - intimidate dissidents and targeted communities with impunity?
I share you disgust but the only way I see these actions being “stupid” is if accountability or blow-back for those in power ever becomes likely.
In terms of what they were designed to do, yes, but also no. (The American contradiction.) And in terms of how they’re actually used, it depends, to some degree, on who is holding the reins. Which right now is Trump’s justice department, ultimately, so we know which way they’re going. It’s stupid because they were prosecutions that reasonably should never have gone ahead because - if nothing else - they were unwinnable (thankfully). Obviously they were intended as a deterrent, as intimidation, but I don’t know how well that worked if the outcome is “no convictions.” The state looks foolish, instead of powerful.
No surprise. I don’t think anyone really believed that the protesters would actually be serving 70 years in prison.
Yup. One could have sanctions ranging from public censure (slap on the wrist), to a fine or lose their license to practice law altogether.
More importantly they open the government to civil liability for such actions. Especially since there is no issues of fact here and a criminal court’s rulings are under a much stricter burden of proof than civil courts.
In Canada we just record them all rioting and then spend the next year or two, tracking them all down and arresting them. Maybe this just works for riots involving hockey?
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.