abraveslimboy asked:

I read your tags and comments about Neil DeGrasse Tyson's rejection from juries, and I was wondering: can you elaborate on them? I'm no lawyer by any means, and now I'm very interested!

Sure. When they select jurors, they’re looking for fair citizens who won’t predetermine the outcome of the trial before it begins. While juries can decide guilty/nonguilty, they are still expected to vote along the word of the law. While the practical uses of jury nullification can be debated, lawyers will try to remove potential jurors who show signs that they will vote outside the letter of the law as appeals take a long time and acquittals are often unable to be overturned (because of double jeopardy).

It is commonly known that, if you want to get out of jury duty, you should bring up your support of jury nullification during the pretrial interview as you will almost be guaranteed to be let go. When NDT declared it was “only 1.3 grams,” he sort of declared his distaste of the drug laws and painted himself as juror who might vote outside of the word of the law. I do agree with his sentiments about the law, but of course they’re going to let him go.

Here’s the wiki page for jury nullification: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification