Georgia legislators, furious about a criminal court jury’s inability this week to agree on the death penalty for mass-murderer Brian G. Nichols, are working on bills that would do away with the need of unanimity on verdicts in the penalty phase of capital cases.
Three jurors voted against execution. Rather than listen to the argument of her pro-execution colleagues, one juror plugged her ears with her music-player headset. The judge could only sentence Nichols to what amounts to perpetual imprisonment.
Georgia Representative Barry Fleming, who has twice before attempted such legislation, says the problem with the current law is that it allows death-penalty opponents to sneak into the jury box. Lawmakers of like mind think the solution is not, to example, to prosecute them for perjury, but to deprive the defendant of the protection of a twelve-vote verdict.
The United States Supreme Court long ago concluded that death-penalty opponents, if they identify themselves during examination, can be excluded from capital case-juries for cause. The three Georgia jurors seem to have disagreed, promoting the power of jury nullification to equality with the power of the highest court in the nation.
Which begs the question: if a citizen is entitled to a trial by a jury of his peers, what are the arguments for excluding those of the citizen’s peers who conscientiously oppose execution?
Georgia legislators, furious about a criminal court jury’s inability this week to agree on the death penalty for mass-murderer Brian G. Nichols, are working on bills that would do away with the need of unanimity on verdicts in the penalty phase of capital cases.
Three jurors voted against execution. Rather than listen to the argument of her pro-execution colleagues, one juror plugged her ears with her music-player headset. The judge could only sentence Nichols to what amounts to perpetual imprisonment.
Georgia Representative Barry Fleming, who has twice before attempted such legislation, says the problem with the current law is that it allows death-penalty opponents to sneak into the jury box. Lawmakers of like mind think the solution is not, to example, to prosecute them for perjury, but to deprive the defendant of the protection of a twelve-vote verdict.
The United States Supreme Court long ago concluded that death-penalty opponents, if they identify themselves during examination, can be excluded from capital case-juries for cause. The three Georgia jurors seem to have disagreed, promoting the power of jury nullification to equality with the power of the highest court in the nation.
Which begs the question: if a citizen is entitled to a trial by a jury of his peers, what are the arguments for excluding those of the citizen’s peers who conscientiously oppose execution?