HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 7, 2014 The only problem I see is that they most likely won't even know what jury nullification is, let alone knowing it is one of their options. That's what I (and the video) are saying. If they don't already know about it, they won't be told by the lawyers or the judge. And whomever brings it up in deliberations (i.e. says the words "jury nullification") might risk a mistrial, if someone (one of the jurors) rats them out to the court. That is, if they ever make it to the jury... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
revenger 473 Posted August 7, 2014 perhaps a group of citizens exercising their 1st amendment rights holding large placards at the courthouse explaining jury nullification? maybe some public service announcements, mailers or billboards explaining the same. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 7, 2014 perhaps a group of citizens exercising their 1st amendment rights holding large placards at the courthouse explaining jury nullification? maybe some public service announcements, mailers or billboards explaining the same. Not if the jury is "sequestered." You'd have to catch them right at "voire/dire." And, given that the prosecution is attempting to "deter," I think they might just go for sequestration in this case. Bring on the "combi vans with blackened windows, etc." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
njgunrunner 0 Posted August 7, 2014 Young african-american single mother from philly arrested for concealed carry on Ac expressway. She was denied a first offender plea bargain with no jail time. link to origional article was broken (7/16/14) http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/07/16/honest-mistake-leads-to-philly-mother-facing-three-years-on-gun-charge/ another article on this topic (8/2014): http://allenbwest.com/2014/08/real-war-women-single-black-mother-faces-jail-honest-mistake/ another article on this topic (8/2/2014): http://www.trentonian.com/general-news/20140802/new-jerseys-tight-gun-laws-ensnare-out-of-staters (8/5/14) TV Video of topic: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Philly-Mom-Facing-Jail-Time-for-Possessing-Licensed-Gun-269922391.html (8/6/14) updated article: http://www.philly.com/philly/news/local/20140806_Weapons_charge_won_t_be_dropped_against_Philadelphia_woman.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jm1827 284 Posted August 7, 2014 Not if the jury is "sequestered." You'd have to catch them right at "voire/dire." And, given that the prosecution is attempting to "deter," I think they might just go for sequestration in this case. Bring on the "combi vans with blackened windows, etc." I am by no means a legal expert but wouldn't sequestering be a little over the top for a case like this? It isn't like it is a major drug case or a murder or anything like that, wouldn't this be a big waste of taxpayer $$? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 7, 2014 I am by no means a legal expert but wouldn't sequestering be a little over the top for a case like this? It isn't like it is a major drug case or a murder or anything like that, wouldn't this be a big waste of taxpayer $$? I think not offering PTI, etc., is "over the top." If the prosecutor is going to all these lengths to set an example and to "deter," why not go "all the way?..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Contrvlr 17 Posted August 7, 2014 I think not offering PTI, etc., is "over the top." If the prosecutor is going to all these lengths to set an example and to "deter,"" We can't "deter" actual crime, so we are going to make an example of this young lady in the hopes that it will stop actual criminals from doing the same thing More fantastic logic from idiot lawmakers Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zeke 5,504 Posted August 7, 2014 " We can't "deter" actual crime, so we are going to make an example of this young lady in the hopes that it will stop actual criminals from doing the same thing More fantastic logic from idiot lawmakers This ! It is ridiculous what nj does to people, and what it does not do to criminals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Midwest 28 Posted August 7, 2014 I think not offering PTI, etc., is "over the top." If the prosecutor is going to all these lengths to set an example and to "deter," why not go "all the way?..." This could also backfire and also expose the insanity of NJ Gun laws to the rest of the country. Then maybe the NRA, GOA and other organizations will get off their asses and finally start paying attention to NJ. This will also put the spotlight on Gov. Christie as well. To where he will have to discuss this case and his real views on gun control to the rest of the country. I bet right now he is looking to further his career in an possible Republican administration in the near future. This is something Christie just can't 'sit on the fence' or blow it off by saying "New Jersey is Special" . That won't play in the other pro-gun states and 'Middle America". I can also see Evan Nappen making quite a few media appearances over this case and NJ in general thus shedding the spotlight on NJ even further. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 7, 2014 " We can't "deter" actual crime, so we are going to make an example of this young lady in the hopes that it will stop actual criminals from doing the same thing More fantastic logic from idiot lawmakers I don't think the prosecutor is attempting to "deter" criminals. He knows he can't. I think they're attempting to "deter" law abiding citizens just like this young lady. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 7, 2014 This could also backfire and also expose the insanity of NJ Gun laws to the rest of the country. Then maybe the NRA, GOA and other organizations will get off their asses and finally start paying attention to NJ. This will also put the spotlight on Gov. Christie as well to the point he will have to discuss this case and his real views on gun control to the rest of the country as he looks to further his career in an possible Republican administration in the near future. I can also see Evan Nappen can make quite a few media appearances over this case and NJ in general thus shedding the spotlight on NJ even further. The more MSM exposure/spin Evan can pony up, the better for her, and the better for us. We just have to make sure the MSM doesn't quash it or "re-spin" it towards the anti side. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
djg0770 481 Posted August 7, 2014 " We can't "deter" actual crime, so we are going to make an example of this young lady in the hopes that it will stop actual criminals from doing the same thing More fantastic logic from idiot lawmakers You miss the point entirely. We can't deter crime, but we can deter otherwise law abiding citizens from doing what this woman did so we are going to make an example of her and hang her in the town square while REAL SHITBAGS GO FREE. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Contrvlr 17 Posted August 7, 2014 You miss the point entirely. We can't deter crime, but we can deter otherwise law abiding citizens from doing what this woman did so we are going to make an example of her and hang her in the town square while REAL SHITBAGS GO FREE. No I haven't I completely understand that real criminals don't give a shit , and prosecuting this young lady will have no affect on them Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 7, 2014 No I haven't I completely understand that real criminals don't give a shit , and prosecuting this young lady will have no affect on them But it *might* have an effect on the law-abiding citizen who might do what she did. It might put the fear on to just "not carry" at all. I think that's what they're attempting here... control of the law-abiding citizen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Contrvlr 17 Posted August 7, 2014 But it *might* have an effect on the law-abiding citizen who might do what she did. It might put the fear on to just "not carry" at all. Agreed I think that's what they're attempting here... control of the law-abiding citizen.Under the premise of " preventing crime " Just like the mag limit, won't stop actual criminals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jm1827 284 Posted August 7, 2014 This could also backfire and also expose the insanity of NJ Gun laws to the rest of the country. Then maybe the NRA, GOA and other organizations will get off their asses and finally start paying attention to NJ. This will also put the spotlight on Gov. Christie as well. To where he will have to discuss this case and his real views on gun control to the rest of the country. I bet right now he is looking to further his career in an possible Republican administration in the near future. This is something Christie just can't 'sit on the fence' or blow it off by saying "New Jersey is Special" . That won't play in the other pro-gun states and 'Middle America". I can also see Evan Nappen making quite a few media appearances over this case and NJ in general thus shedding the spotlight on NJ even further. My guess is Christie waits for the most opportune moment and pardons her Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyB 4,322 Posted August 7, 2014 My guess is Christie waits for the most opportune moment and pardons her If that happens, and I hope for her sake it does, what about the next victim they catch??? does Christy pardon all of them? Now as I channel Nostradamus, here are my predictions. With all the MSM and public opinion pressure on this case, Behind the scene pressure will be put on the prosecutor to drop the case on a made up technicality. The charges will be dropped, her record cleared. We WILL get CC sooner that any of us ever thought!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stonecoldchavez 92 Posted August 8, 2014 JohnnyB- Not going to happen. This Prosecutor is looking to make a name for himself. Look at all the attention it is bringing him. All Pros. care about is their conviction percentage rate. That and donations get them bumped up to Asst. Pros and eventually 1st Asst. Pros. After that they can be up for the next open Jurist spot depending on how much money they contributed to their Party. Her best chance of getting off is the Jury. South Jersey is an entirely different make up (think Northern Alabama) in regards to guns. Hopefully the Jury will be made up of people that see the true injustice in our gun laws and do not find her guilty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maintenanceguy 510 Posted August 8, 2014 Atlantic County is two very different worlds. But since the prosecution gets a limited number of jurors to kick out and the defense gets an unlimited number (until it gets ridiculous and the judge steps in), I would think that Napen will have an easy time recognizing those who might be pro 2A. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 8, 2014 Atlantic County is two very different worlds. But since the prosecution gets a limited number of jurors to kick out and the defense gets an unlimited number (until it gets ridiculous and the judge steps in), I would think that Napen will have an easy time recognizing those who might be pro 2A. Those voire/dire questions are going to be awfully interesting... I don't know if either side will get away with asking prospective jurors *directly* of their 2A position (i.e. do you own firearms.... or are you pro-2A or not...)... I would think many would not want to answer those questions in open court. They'll have to come up with other "non direct" questions that might give them some indications as to which way the candidate is leaning. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CMJeepster 2,777 Posted August 8, 2014 They could do it indirectly like they did in a (firearms-related) trial in which I served as a juror and ask, after seating, what bumper stickers one had, what TV shows they watched and what radio programs they listened to. I answered "Keep honking, I'm reloading," "NRA news," and "GFH Radio," respectively, and still got seated because I was the last juror in the pool after all of the old ladies and angry people got dismissed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SgtToadette 59 Posted August 8, 2014 NRA posted this on YouTube: Ginny Simone Reporting | Justice in New Jersey?: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maintenanceguy 510 Posted August 8, 2014 I was also asked "what non-political bumper stickers do you have on your vehicle?" Since all of my pro=2A decals are political, I said "none." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 8, 2014 NRA posted this on YouTube: Ginny Simone Reporting | Justice in New Jersey?: Excellent video! Let's just hope it can get seen by the people who need to see it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 8, 2014 I was also asked "what non-political bumper stickers do you have on your vehicle?" Since all of my pro=2A decals are political, I said "none." I have no bumper stickers on my car at all... initially, because I just didn't want bumper stickers cluttering up my car. But it also seems to be helpful for issues like this! They could do it indirectly like they did in a (firearms-related) trial in which I served as a juror and ask, after seating, what bumper stickers one had, what TV shows they watched and what radio programs they listened to. I answered "Keep honking, I'm reloading," "NRA news," and "GFH Radio," respectively, and still got seated because I was the last juror in the pool after all of the old ladies and angry people got dismissed. The problem being, I could (plausibly & truthfully) answer those questions any which way I wanted to, to achieve the desired outcome for me. But it's harder to do that for a question like "Do/Did you ever own any firearms..." or "Do you support/oppose the RKBA, per the 2A...". I suspect a lot of candidates might not want to answer such a direct question in open court. The judge will allow "sidebars" if the jury candidate wants to answer privately. See this thread for a prior discussion. And I suspect both sides would be willing to dump juror candidates based on those answers, more easily than the other questions. Certainly, the defense will want pro-2A people, and the prosecution not. I truly hope that the defense can challenge more candidates than can the prosecution. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
njpilot 671 Posted August 8, 2014 If this prosecutor wants to make a name for himself, how about misogynist? I think we need to get a campaign started labeling him as such and that he's waging a "war on women". He let a wife beater go, basically unscathed, while he is throwing the book at this young woman who had no ill intentions and was just ignorant of our unconstitutional laws. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michael2013 56 Posted August 8, 2014 ..." or "Do you support/oppose the RKBA, per the 2A"... What about an answer like "I support the Bill of Rights in its entirety" (?) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gunguy1960 2 Posted August 8, 2014 This case really shows that the jails are over crowded. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
HBecwithFn7 296 Posted August 8, 2014 What about an answer like "I support the Bill of Rights in its entirety" (?) I would gather the atty would either accept that as "Yes, I support the 2A," or ask a clarifying question (i.e. "does that include the 2nd amendment").. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diamondd817 826 Posted August 8, 2014 Am I allowed to wright to the prosecutor and let him know what a POS scumbag he is? Is there any legal ramifications to doing this? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites