Taysir385 t1_isdv4a1 wrote
Reply to comment by ithriosa in Parkland prosecutors ask for an investigation after a juror says she was threatened by ‘a fellow juror’ during deliberations - CNN by SilentR0b
> .This is not a rhetorical question. Would you be in favor of that?
It's clearly a rhetorical question, because there's no just world where such a law is anything other than absurd.
It's clear we don't see eye to eye on this. I'm out. Be well, friend.
ithriosa t1_isewjt2 wrote
>It's clearly a rhetorical question,
It is not rhetorical. I was honestly not sure how you would answer. And I am surprised by your answer.
>there's no just world where such a law is anything other than absurd.
Sure no "just world" however we do not live in a perfectly just world.
Why is it absurd? By your prior logic it should be better than nothing. If you see the death penalty as an unjust law for which a juror should be able to prevent someone from facing for ANY reason, then what do you think is wrong with this? This offers an additional reason for which a person can avoid this unjust law
It seems fairly consistent with your prior reasoning.
>It's clear we don't see eye to eye on this. I'm out.
It is interesting that you leave the moment you think it is out of your favor. If you only talk with people who you see eye to eye with, then you are simply enforcing your own echo chamber.
Taysir385 t1_isft63s wrote
> It is interesting that you leave the moment you think it is out of your favor. If you only talk with people who you see eye to eye with, then you are simply enforcing your own echo chamber.
No friend, I left when you tried to change the discussion from general examination of jury nullification to specific arguments about unconscious racial bias and whether or not I support the death penalty.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments