This is jury nullification in action, and as a result, a Montana judge has refused to convict anyone of marijuana possession.
In Montana, Teuray Cornell was arrested on a marijuana possession charge. But he only had about as much marijuana as it would take to roll a single joint. The police tried to suggest that he was a marijuana dealer even with this small amount of the plant.
Montana is well-known to be a fairly conservative state, but when it came time for the pre-trial jury screening of this man, the judge simply could not find people willing to convict the man.
The judge could not find one single person who was willing to convict a man over a small amount of marijuana.
To seat a 12-person jury, Judge Robert L. Deschamps III of Missoula County District Court had called a passel of Montanans to serve, and 27 had arrived at court on Dec. 16. So far, so good.
But after the charges were read, one of the jurors raised a hand.
She said, Ive got a real problem with these marijuana cases, Judge Deschamps recalled on Wednesday. And after she got through, a couple more raised their hands. All told, five jurors raised questions about marijuana prosecution.
Mr. Cornell the misdemeanor possession charge was dismissed out of fear that 12 jurors who would convict in this marijuana-friendly state, could simply not be found.
John Masterson, the founder and director of the Montana chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, told the Times that using marijuana is essentially a mainstream activity in Missoula.
Its something that people of all walks of life enjoy responsibly, Masterson explained.
This was something Id never encountered before, Judge Deschamps said. It does raise a question about the next case, indicating to the Times that he would not convict people of similar charges in the future.
Watch the video report below and help SPREAD THE WORD about jury nullification!
They will increasingly find it hard to indict or convict people on pot charges when other states allow it freely and so many people are breaking the law.
"They will increasingly find it hard to indict or convict people on pot charges when other states allow it freely and so many people are breaking the law."
All well and good for a law you don't like. And when it's a law you support?
Is this the way to go about it? Why not simply overturn the law? Oh, you don't have the votes?
Is this the way to go about it? Why not simply overturn the law? Oh, you don't have the votes?
There is a history of juries nullifying laws.
This seems to be a modern instance.
Now everyone getting busted for pot in Montana will think hard about demanding a jury trial, to force the issue. And some will do it just to push nullification.
Montana got very near decriminalizing pot about 20-25 years back as I recall. So this is fertile ground for nullification.
I think we've crossed the Rubicon on pot laws. Maybe on all the drug laws.
After all, legal opiate overdoses kill about as many now as illegal drugs do. The doctor is becoming little more than the pusher of a high-grade product.
In this way, both legal pharma drugs and legal pot in some states is sounding the death knell for most drug laws.
After all, what are they going to do, close the borders to stop the Mexican heroin and other drugs? Don't make me laugh.