7 hours ago6 points(+0/-0/+6Score on mirror)2 children
Well there is jury nullification which is similar. A jury can say yes the defendant is guilty but we will acquit because the law or the application of the law in this case is unjust.
It only takes one person on the jury to do this but of course nobody in the court is allowed to tell the jury this so the person has to know about it separate from the trial.
The Quash (Legalman) has advocated for jury nullification for years on his podcast. But for it to work you need a citizenry who isn't retarded. So forget this working in America.
6 hours ago5 points(+0/-0/+5Score on mirror)2 children
In the USA, they'll flat out ask if you believe in this and disqualify you if you do. Also, you'll be charged with contempt if they can prove you went in with the intent to nullify.
5 hours ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)1 child
I’ve been in jury selection a couple times and they’ve never asked that. The problem for them if they ask it is that now they’ve mentioned it and they’ve brought up a topic that 99% of people have never heard of and now they all know what it is.
True, certainly worth mentioning but you’d have to do something stupid for them to be able to prove that
I’ve found that asking the question of what the ZOG “can do” is irrelevant. The ZOG will do anything it feels it can get away with. The proper question is, “Who will kill the judge if [X] happens?” If the answer is no one, then [X] will happen, no matter what it is.
It only takes one person on the jury to do this but of course nobody in the court is allowed to tell the jury this so the person has to know about it separate from the trial.
True, certainly worth mentioning but you’d have to do something stupid for them to be able to prove that
Thats when you lie and say you have no idea what that is.
https://www.givesendgo.com/shilohhendrix?s=09
despite all the legal BULLSHIT she has to go with, she's set for life.