When a jury goes along with a rogue prosecutor in railroading the accused, it is certainly dereliction of their moral duty but it is not, by definition, nullification because they are in agreement with the prosecution.
Jury Nullification in its historical - American - context has been profoundly corrupting. It sets the Klansman free on the proven charge of murder and sends the black man to the gallows on a fraudulent charge of rape.
Klansmen have been set free because juries were unwilling to find them guilty, i.e "jury nullification".
But the black man in your example was not railroaded because of "jury nullification" but rather due to the lack of it.
As I stated earlier, juries are not necessary to determine whether a law has been violated. Indeed, laypersons are far less qualified to make that determination than are judges, prosecutors and lawyers.
It's so you can't be brought into a trial on fake charges and convicted in private behind closed doors.
Yes, a jury trial is certainly a protection against fraud and abuse of power. This is part of what is meant by the jury being the final check and balance against bad law. The other part is juries can and sometimes do judge the law itself, not just the practice of it.
Ironically, many criminal charges are not tried before juries anymore. They handled with plea bargains, which are essentially deals made in private and often the charges are contrived by over-zealous prosecutors. Sometimes the deal is better than the outcome of a jury trial, assuming the jury believes it's only there to judge the guilt or innocence of the accused. Obviously, that was the outcome of this trial.
The jury's job is to determine if she broke the law, not determine if the law makes sense.
If that is true, what is the point in having a trial by jury? A judge or a panel of judges can determine whether or not a law has been broken and would be eminently better qualified to do so.
The whole point of a trial by a jury of one's peers is to provide the final check and balance against bad law. Over time, prosecutors have succeeded in swaying popular opinion that the jury's job is to determine if the defendant broke the law, not determine if the law is just. The term "jury nullification" is a phrase coined by prosecutors to cast a pall over those who exercise their constitutional rights.
Of course, if you intend to judge the law as well as the accused, you'd best not show your hand until the verdict is due or you'll be removed and if you ever register Libertarian, you'll never be called for jury duty because prosecutors want jurors who will accept their dogma.
Jim Goodnight doesn't spell out what he'd change to liven up the curriculum but cell phones and iPods notwithstanding, people need to learn how to read and write. They need to learn mathematics, science and history. He decries last century's teaching methods as antiquated but they worked for him. He says kids are smarter because they grew up with more advanced technology. They take the technology he's referring to for granted. He claims kids are dropping out because they're bored due to the antiquated teaching methods.
The kids really haven't changed all that much. But the schools sure have. Today's schools with their zero-tolerance, post-911, police state lockdown mentality are more like penal institutions than they were when I was a kid. Most kids aren't nearly as naughty as I was but they catch an order of magnitude more hell for anything they do. I thought I had it bad. But today's kids have it worse. I hate it for 'em. I really do. They are voting with their feet and the ruling class is aghast.
Actually virtual all economists agree that the inflationary rate is overstated by around 1%.... Chances are if your wages are really increasing by that percentage, your spending or consumption is up (did you buy that iPhone..?). Inflation has recently been around 2.5-3%, realistically around 2%...
The article you quoted says $1 in 1976 bought what $3.55 does today. If I divide my present salary by 3.55 and compare it to what I was making in 1976, I see a 7% increase. From all the people I've compared notes with, I don't think I'm far from the average pay, although my work has been far above average. Bear in mind, I'm considerably older than most of my coworkers and to stay employed in technical work, I've changed jobs and careers. Nonetheless, it's apparent that my wages have not outpaced inflation over the long run. Perhaps if I had been management material, I'd have made better money but I wanted to continue doing technical work.
I am close to going to truck driving scholl. Those guys earn close to what I do per hour, and then get overtime on top. A union truck driver can earn 6 figures for over the road tractor trailer driving.
I always heard the post WWII baby boom occurred between 1945 and 1960. Some people have tried to extend it to the mid sixties but you're the first I've heard trying to extend it back into the early 40s. I have older cousins who were born then. They have as different a mindset from those of us who grew up in the 60s as the people who were born in the 60s.
Ever since Suckit Shiatty fired their older employees and offered to hire them back at half what they were making, I have avoided shopping there. Sure, other companies have followed suit but this was a trend setting move on the part of Suckit Shiatty, one that put them on equal footing with the likes of Mal*Wart.
I figure if a company is doing stuff like that, they're probably doing other objectionable things too, such as hyper aggressive loss prevention measures, grabbing people on the way out and stuff like that. I'm no shoplifter but I'd druther not expose myself to the possibility of that kind of treatment and with the cavity search mentality prevalent today, that narrows my shopping options.
As for the security personel conducting such detentions, they might ought to rethink their career choice. It's a numbers game. Sooner or later one of these loss prevention goons is going lay his hands on the wrong guy and be lucky if he's left one to wipe with.
Twenty five years ago, I was an analog circuit designer in a big electronics company. We had no internet access but there were mainframe terminals and workstations around. Some of the engineers became obsessed with them even though they quite limited. Some engineers wrote and played games on them. An astute old technician observed that you could "fuck off on the bench or fuck off on the computer."
Today, I have a colleague who chats on his cell phone incessantly and text messages his buddies. Another coworker has an iPhone. Now there's a productivity black hole if I ever saw one.
But never mind unproductive people who waste their own time. If they don't get their work done, for the most part, that's their problem. There are some people I really wish WOULD goof off. They are the counterproductive people who are busy doing things that cause unnecessary extra work for us all or make a huge mess we'll have to clean up.
Don't worry about it though; even though labor unions seem to have the upper hand at the moment, they are one of the key forces that bring automation to assembly lines.
You think labor unions have the upper hand?
Union membership has been shriveling for decades. The UAW is on the ropes.
Because it would decrease the cost to build them, which opens up the potential to either sell them for less, or sell them at the same price with more capability. Either of which would also put them on a better competitive footing with Japan, Korea, and so forth.
Cutting costs won't help much if the design is bad. Most American car companies are badly managed and this is reflected in their designs. They blame this on labor but labor doesn't design the cars. Price matters but I'm not buying a poorly designed car no matter how inexpensive.
"Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus wants free college tuition for US math, science, and engineering majors conditional upon working or teaching in the field for at least four years....
Suppose through no fault of their own they aren't able to find employment in their field of study. Do they have to pay back the tuition?
The reason science and engineering enrollment has fallen off is lack of demand for US citizens in these fields. We're hemorrhaging manufacturing and engineering jobs. The remaining jobs are filled by foreigners on work visas. The US is not using all the science and engineering graduates it has already produced. Adding to their number will not improve the situation.
Engineering and science curricula are difficult and demanding. With diminished prospects for a lucrative career, fewer US citizens are inclined to toil 4-5 years to get these degrees. Corporate lobbyists have the ear of the politicians who are proposing such remedies. Hence, their efforts focus on increasing the supply of labor in the face of diminished demand and reduced price (flat wage growth).
I'm not convinced that there are that many jobs available in science (thus not much need for more graduates). Engineering is probably different though.
Yeah, it's even worse. For example, the vast majority of electronics manufacturing and design has been offshored.
The RIAA might find it particularly troubling that the students are coming in armed with substantial expert witness declarations attacking the entire underpinning of the RIAA's case...
They might find it even more alarming if the student came in armed with something else.
With dwindling opportunities for US citizens in engineering, flat wage growth and short career spans for those already in engineering, enrollments have dropped over the past 7 years at most engineering schools. Selectively charging more for engineering curricula is piling onto this trend.
The idea that a customer of a casino should be held criminally liable for bad software on a slot machine is absurd. It's even more ridiculous than throwing out card counters for "cheating".
This will make it very hard for new musical groups to get started as many small venues simply stop having live music to avoid paying extortion money to these shakedown squads. It's ironic because many of the artists these organizations claim to represent started out playing covers in small venues that paid no such tribute money. In effect, the message is don't do as we did.
Slashdot Mirror
Jury Nullification happens whenever a jury votes its desires and not it oath to be true to the facts and the law.
No sir. It is a not guilty verdict or acquittal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_Nullification
http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Jury%20Nullification
When a jury goes along with a rogue prosecutor in railroading the accused, it is certainly dereliction of their moral duty but it is not, by definition, nullification because they are in agreement with the prosecution.
Jury Nullification in its historical - American - context has been profoundly corrupting. It sets the Klansman free on the proven charge of murder and sends the black man to the gallows on a fraudulent charge of rape.
Klansmen have been set free because juries were unwilling to find them guilty, i.e "jury nullification".
But the black man in your example was not railroaded because of "jury nullification" but rather due to the lack of it.
To, um, determine whether the law was broken
As I stated earlier, juries are not necessary to determine whether a law has been violated. Indeed, laypersons are far less qualified to make that determination than are judges, prosecutors and lawyers.
It's so you can't be brought into a trial on fake charges and convicted in private behind closed doors.
Yes, a jury trial is certainly a protection against fraud and abuse of power. This is part of what is meant by the jury being the final check and balance against bad law. The other part is juries can and sometimes do judge the law itself, not just the practice of it.
Ironically, many criminal charges are not tried before juries anymore. They handled with plea bargains, which are essentially deals made in private and often the charges are contrived by over-zealous prosecutors. Sometimes the deal is better than the outcome of a jury trial, assuming the jury believes it's only there to judge the guilt or innocence of the accused. Obviously, that was the outcome of this trial.
The jury's job is to determine if she broke the law, not determine if the law makes sense.
If that is true, what is the point in having a trial by jury? A judge or a panel of judges can determine whether or not a law has been broken and would be eminently better qualified to do so.
The whole point of a trial by a jury of one's peers is to provide the final check and balance against bad law. Over time, prosecutors have succeeded in swaying popular opinion that the jury's job is to determine if the defendant broke the law, not determine if the law is just. The term "jury nullification" is a phrase coined by prosecutors to cast a pall over those who exercise their constitutional rights.
Of course, if you intend to judge the law as well as the accused, you'd best not show your hand until the verdict is due or you'll be removed and if you ever register Libertarian, you'll never be called for jury duty because prosecutors want jurors who will accept their dogma.
Jim Goodnight doesn't spell out what he'd change to liven up the curriculum but cell phones and iPods notwithstanding, people need to learn how to read and write. They need to learn mathematics, science and history. He decries last century's teaching methods as antiquated but they worked for him. He says kids are smarter because they grew up with more advanced technology. They take the technology he's referring to for granted. He claims kids are dropping out because they're bored due to the antiquated teaching methods.
The kids really haven't changed all that much. But the schools sure have. Today's schools with their zero-tolerance, post-911, police state lockdown mentality are more like penal institutions than they were when I was a kid. Most kids aren't nearly as naughty as I was but they catch an order of magnitude more hell for anything they do. I thought I had it bad. But today's kids have it worse. I hate it for 'em. I really do. They are voting with their feet and the ruling class is aghast.
Wow, how many others of the three digit crowd are still around?
I'm still hangin' in there like a hair on a biscuit.
Most US citizens with PhDs are underemployed.
The Ph.D. Glut Revisited
They simply need to train more technocrats because their sectors are growing compared to those sectors in the US, which are economically mature.
The manufacturing sectors in the US are in decline and have been for some time.
Few of the class of 2006 are going on to grad study in engineering or jobs in the field.
This is no surprise since engineering job opportunities for US citizens have been dwindling in 21st century.
Actually virtual all economists agree that the inflationary rate is overstated by around 1%.
The article you quoted says $1 in 1976 bought what $3.55 does today. If I divide my present salary by 3.55 and compare it to what I was making in 1976, I see a 7% increase. From all the people I've compared notes with, I don't think I'm far from the average pay, although my work has been far above average. Bear in mind, I'm considerably older than most of my coworkers and to stay employed in technical work, I've changed jobs and careers. Nonetheless, it's apparent that my wages have not outpaced inflation over the long run. Perhaps if I had been management material, I'd have made better money but I wanted to continue doing technical work.
I am close to going to truck driving scholl. Those guys earn close to what I do per hour, and then get overtime on top. A union truck driver can earn 6 figures for over the road tractor trailer driving.
Not for long.
Mexico trucks to roll on U.S. highways
Now, baby boomers include anyone who is 42 to 64.
I always heard the post WWII baby boom occurred between 1945 and 1960. Some people have tried to extend it to the mid sixties but you're the first I've heard trying to extend it back into the early 40s. I have older cousins who were born then. They have as different a mindset from those of us who grew up in the 60s as the people who were born in the 60s.
Ever since Suckit Shiatty fired their older employees and offered to hire them back at half what they were making, I have avoided shopping there. Sure, other companies have followed suit but this was a trend setting move on the part of Suckit Shiatty, one that put them on equal footing with the likes of Mal*Wart.
I figure if a company is doing stuff like that, they're probably doing other objectionable things too, such as hyper aggressive loss prevention measures, grabbing people on the way out and stuff like that. I'm no shoplifter but I'd druther not expose myself to the possibility of that kind of treatment and with the cavity search mentality prevalent today, that narrows my shopping options.
As for the security personel conducting such detentions, they might ought to rethink their career choice. It's a numbers game. Sooner or later one of these loss prevention goons is going lay his hands on the wrong guy and be lucky if he's left one to wipe with.
Twenty five years ago, I was an analog circuit designer in a big electronics company. We had no internet access but there were mainframe terminals and workstations around. Some of the engineers became obsessed with them even though they quite limited. Some engineers wrote and played games on them. An astute old technician observed that you could "fuck off on the bench or fuck off on the computer."
Today, I have a colleague who chats on his cell phone incessantly and text messages his buddies. Another coworker has an iPhone. Now there's a productivity black hole if I ever saw one.
But never mind unproductive people who waste their own time. If they don't get their work done, for the most part, that's their problem. There are some people I really wish WOULD goof off. They are the counterproductive people who are busy doing things that cause unnecessary extra work for us all or make a huge mess we'll have to clean up.
Don't worry about it though; even though labor unions seem to have the upper hand at the moment, they are one of the key forces that bring automation to assembly lines.
You think labor unions have the upper hand?
Union membership has been shriveling for decades. The UAW is on the ropes.
Because it would decrease the cost to build them, which opens up the potential to either sell them for less, or sell them at the same price with more capability. Either of which would also put them on a better competitive footing with Japan, Korea, and so forth.
Cutting costs won't help much if the design is bad. Most American car companies are badly managed and this is reflected in their designs. They blame this on labor but labor doesn't design the cars. Price matters but I'm not buying a poorly designed car no matter how inexpensive.
The only jobs that aren't going offshore are jobs like plumbing and construction.
Yeah but go to a construction site and tell me who you see working there.
If demand had fallen off for these fields, we wouldn't see the salaries that we do.
Salaries adjusted for inflation flattened in the early 90s.
Four year engineering graduates command the highest salaries of any graduate (four year programs).
For those fortunate enough to find engineering jobs, compared to other lines of work, perhaps. But wages in all lines of work have stagnated.
Another consideration is that you don't see many older engineers anymore. They are still around and they're good, just not employed.
"Montana Democratic Senator Max Baucus wants free college tuition for US math, science, and engineering majors conditional upon working or teaching in the field for at least four years.
Suppose through no fault of their own they aren't able to find employment in their field of study. Do they have to pay back the tuition?
The reason science and engineering enrollment has fallen off is lack of demand for US citizens in these fields. We're hemorrhaging manufacturing and engineering jobs. The remaining jobs are filled by foreigners on work visas. The US is not using all the science and engineering graduates it has already produced. Adding to their number will not improve the situation.
Engineering and science curricula are difficult and demanding. With diminished prospects for a lucrative career, fewer US citizens are inclined to toil 4-5 years to get these degrees. Corporate lobbyists have the ear of the politicians who are proposing such remedies. Hence, their efforts focus on increasing the supply of labor in the face of diminished demand and reduced price (flat wage growth).
I'm not convinced that there are that many jobs available in science (thus not much need for more graduates). Engineering is probably different though.
Yeah, it's even worse. For example, the vast majority of electronics manufacturing and design has been offshored.
The RIAA might find it particularly troubling that the students are coming in armed with substantial expert witness declarations attacking the entire underpinning of the RIAA's case
They might find it even more alarming if the student came in armed with something else.
Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty" ?
Oh, we leapfrogged that and then blew past "guilty until proven innocent". Nowadays, you're guilty when nifonged.
With dwindling opportunities for US citizens in engineering, flat wage growth and short career spans for those already in engineering, enrollments have dropped over the past 7 years at most engineering schools. Selectively charging more for engineering curricula is piling onto this trend.
See Jobs Update: The Death of US Engineering
The idea that a customer of a casino should be held criminally liable for bad software on a slot machine is absurd. It's even more ridiculous than throwing out card counters for "cheating".
This will make it very hard for new musical groups to get started as many small venues simply stop having live music to avoid paying extortion money to these shakedown squads. It's ironic because many of the artists these organizations claim to represent started out playing covers in small venues that paid no such tribute money. In effect, the message is don't do as we did.