Fact check: Jury nullification doesn't work in real life

1. Summary of the results

1. Summary of the results: All analyses agree that the original statement, "jury nullification doesn't work in real life," is false or at least partially false. They provide numerous examples of successful jury nullification throughout history, including cases related to marijuana possession, firearms possession, Prohibition, the Civil Rights era, and anti-war protests. They also cite studies and statistics suggesting that jury nullification occurs more frequently than commonly acknowledged.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints: While the analyses provide arguments in favor of jury nullification as a tool against unjust laws, they lack perspectives critical of its application. Missing context includes: the potential for jury nullification to be used to acquit clearly guilty individuals based on prejudice or bias, the disruption of the rule of law it can cause, the lack of legal guidance provided to jurors about nullification, and the inconsistency and unpredictability it introduces into the legal system. The perspective of victims of crimes where juries might nullify verdicts is also absent. Finally, while some analyses mention judges' opposition to the practice, more detailed discussion of legal arguments against its validity and the efforts made to limit its use would provide further balance.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement: The original statement contains misinformation by flatly stating jury nullification "doesn't work." The statement appears to stem from a misunderstanding or denial of the existence and effectiveness of jury nullification, potentially motivated by a belief that all laws should be strictly enforced regardless of individual circumstances or perceived injustices.