Thread by @cboyack

This country needs a lot more jury trials (95% of cases are resolved through prosecutorial plea deals)…

and a lot more jury nullification.

There's a fun history behind jury nullification that hardly anyone knows about. Story below… 🧵

The jury’s power to judge the justice of a law itself dates back to the Magna Carta, when the king was forced to pledge that he would punish no person for a violation of
the law without the consent of his
peers.

But things really took off in 1670…

William Penn, then a 26-year-old Quaker
preacher, was arrested in London in August 1670 for violating the Conventicle Act, which prohibited religious assemblies of more than five people for illegal (dissenting) worship.

Penn had openly flouted the law by preaching publicly.

At trial, the jury in Penn’s case refused to convict him, with many jurors feeling quite strongly about the injustice of the law itself.

The panel of judges was furious, leading the presiding judge to tell the jury:

"Gentlemen, you shall not be dismissed until we have a verdict that the court will accept; and you shall be locked up without meat, drink, fire, or tobacco. You shall not think thus to abuse the court. We will have a verdict by the help of God, or you shall starve for it."

The judges repeatedly sequestered the jury (and once denied them food and water) in hopes of a different result, but each time the same verdict was rendered for the alleged crime: not guilty.

Finally, in frustration at the jury’s obstinance…

Penn was thrown in jail and the entire jury was forced to join him—and each juror was fined a substantial sum for going against the court’s wishes.

The jury foreman was wealthy and could have paid the fine, but he refused.

The foreman filed a writ of habeas corpus to challenge his imprisonment and following weeks of cruel incarceration won a legal challenge that established a clear precedent that has stood ever since: juries are independent of the court and cannot be punished for their decision.

So today's ability for jurors to exercise their discretion and refused to convict someone of a law, even though they actually did break it, all stems from William Penn (for whom Pennsylvania was named) and his religiously motivated civil disobedience.

If you enjoyed the story, there's more here from our @Libertas policy brief: libertas.org/policy-paper/e…