US Supreme Court Ruling Ends Oregon's Non-unanimous Jury Verdicts

[The Heretic]

US Supreme Court Ruling Ends Oregon's Non-unanimous Jury Convictions

The move ends Oregon’s history of using non-unanimous juries to find people guilty of crimes other than murder.

www.opb.org

Read More

 

[WillametteWill]

Beat me to it, thanks for posting. Coming from a state that had unanimous verdicts (narrows it down to 48 others) it was a surprising to find out Oregon was one of the two. I think the main advantage / disadvantage is it puts jury nullification back on the table.

 

[SHPD_Retired]

I just wonder how many criminals will be released from jail and how many will have their records expunged. This will be a huge amount of work for the court system but oh well, shi* happens.

 

[The Heretic]

never mind

 

[ma96782]

My take on it.....

Non-unanimous juries have been part of Oregon's Constitution since 1934, when voters adopted the practice. Legal scholars argue non-unanimous juries are rooted in discrimination, and that Oregon's law was originally intended to silence the voices of Catholic and Jewish immigrants in the state.

The OR Legislature/voters were WRONG since 1934. So....how many other RIGHTS have they trampled on?

Aloha, Mark

 

[RicInOR]

Unusual Supreme Court Lineup Holds that Jury Verdicts in (Most) Criminal Cases Must Be Unanimous

All three of today's Supreme Court decisions featured unusual alignments among the justices.

reason.com

 

[NW Backpacker]

I'm thinking 1 or 2 jury votes for innocence would be called "reasonable doubt". 10 guilty votes out of 12 is NOT beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[OldBroad44]

I just wonder how many criminals will be released from jail and how many will have their records expunged. This will be a huge amount of work for the court system but oh well, shi* happens.

I'm wondering how many innocent people have been rotting in jail for years.

 

[Alexx1401]

When I read this today I had no idea there was any such thing. Sounds like the courts did this right.

 

[The Heretic]

I'm wondering how many innocent people have been rotting in jail for years.

More than there should be.

Also, some are rotting there for simple drug possession (not dealing) or other 'victimless' crimes.

 

[Lilhigbee]

Oregon Justice Department Warns Supreme Court About Scrapping Unanimous Juries
This was in the sidebar of the OP article. How nice to see that the Oregon Justice?? Dept. is more interested in the status quo than what is right.

 

[Keepmsharp]

As it should be. Complete joke Oregon has been getting away with this.

 

[P7M13]

It should be noted, the Supreme Court was not unanimous in its decision.

 

[trevi]

It should be noted, the Supreme Court was not unanimous in its decision.

Was there pun intended in this remark?

Sorry if I ruined it!

 

[P7M13]

Was there pun intended in this remark?

Sorry if I ruined it!

Yes

 

[SHPD_Retired]

I'm wondering how many innocent people have been rotting in jail for years.

Probably very few.

 

[awshoot]

Probably very few.

Way too many:

How Many Innocent People are in Prison? - Innocence Project

www.innocenceproject.org

Extrapolating from the 281 known DNA exonerations in the US since the late 1980s, a conservative estimate is that 1 percent of the US prison population, approximately 20,000 people, are falsely convicted.

Cases often turn on really irrelevant things -- like the presumptions people make when a person smiles or frowns or other complete garbage regarding likeability, whether the person is good looking, presumptions about how someone ought to behave, and on and on and on. We as a society elevate the judicial processes to some sort of religious level, but the nitty gritty is very messy.

 

[CoastRange57]

I'm wondering how many innocent people have been rotting in jail for years.

They all are. Just ask them. There are over 3,000 prisoners in Pelican Bay and not one of them ever committed a crime.

 

[WillametteWill]

It should be noted, the Supreme Court was not unanimous in its decision.

This has been my mantra for decades. If the nine smartest people in the United States can't agree on almost ANYTHING, how do you expect a jury of us regular folks to be unanimous?

Probably very few.

Yep, agree with this. Are there some? Yes, and we should fight to get them released. But you have to be very careful looking at the so called "innocent" in jail. Many who are released are completely guilty. I used to look at cases of some of these and there was a mountain of evidence as to why they were convicted (many including detailed confessions) and they were overturned because of a procedural error. The DA's office would not retry the case now because it is difficult taking a case to court after two years...try after 20 years. No chance of finding witnesses or expecting them to remember correctly.

Having said that I'll admit that LEO's on the west coast are spoiled (I'm retired now). Ethics on our side of the country run extremely high. I understand some of you have experienced bad policing here and yes, of course it happens. I've experienced bad plumbers too, but most have been good. Have now researched too many encounters and had very credible info on many others of staggering unprofessional / criminal activities of LEO's in other parts of the country. Still, overwhelmingly most are good. Yet, departments hire from the human race and they will slip through even at good departments in CA, WA, OR, AZ, ID, etc.

Non-unanimous juries prevent jury nullification. Good or bad, you decide. I don't think it is really about reasonable doubt, I think it is about getting the juror on the case that manages to hide a strong bias (pro-drugs / pro gun / anti cop), and they can clean their fingernails for the entire trial because they know how they are going to vote before opening remarks.

Respect to all,

Will

 

[P7M13]

This has been my mantra for decades. If the nine smartest people in the United States can't agree on almost ANYTHING, how do you expect a jury of us regular folks to be unanimo

I meant to point that out as ironic.
It is my belief that the exceeding majority of police are kosher.
There are also numerous documented cases of Jury tampering.
A simple reason for why this may have been enacted, in the mid thirties, was economics. Oregon was predominantly agricultural and also sparsely populated. Serving on a jury did create economic hardship.
Yes, there is also no doubt racism was involved too, considering a few ku klux Klan grand dragons came from here. Ever wonder why Oregon is so white?

[edit to add] I think if anyone looks deep enough with their colored glasses on, they will see racism, classism, or separatism of some form in almost any policy. Only in Utopia will a policy equally affect all people.