this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2024
681 points (97.8% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

732 readers
140 users here now

This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.

Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.


Posting Guidelines

All posts should follow this basic structure:

  1. Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?
  2. What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?
  3. Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).
  4. Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).
  5. Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

Rules


Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.

Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.

YTPB matrix channel: For real-time discussions about bastards or to appeal mod actions in YPTB itself.


Some acronyms you might see.


Relevant comms

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 

As per .world worldnews mod, no discussing naughty stuff like jury nullification.

While this post is blowing up, here's the book referenced by the shooter:

Delay Deny Defend - Why Insurance Companies Don't Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It

By request: Full, uncensored video of the shooting. (Fucking obviously NSFW)

Jury nullification: A practical FAQ

Do I have to answer questions about jury nullification?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 78 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Wrong. They try to filter out people who know about jury nullification, but the act itself is not illegal, as you do not have to have the knowledge to accidentally do it anyway.

[–] gregor@gregtech.eu 22 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That seems pretty unfair to filter out people who know about it, it's basically filtering knowledgeable people.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 39 points 2 months ago

There's no basically, that's literally what it is

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

“They” being the state.

[–] helloworld55@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Just to be clear, one of the standard questions to ask a potential jury is "you must be able to render a verdict solely on the evidence presented at the trial and in the context of the law as I will give it to you in my instructions, disregarding any other ideas, notions, or beliefs about the law. Are you able to do this?"

If you know about jury nullification, with the intent of using it, then you need to lie under oath to get past this question.

The question was taken from the New Mexico US courts

[–] Malfeasant@lemm.ee 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Are you able to do this?

Ahead of time, I could answer truthfully that I am able. I don't have to say "but when the time comes, I may choose not to for any reason"

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Check the links in the main post. Your example question and many other variations of it are explicitly addressed there.

But in short, you answer truthfully, but stick to the letter of your answer and not what the judge thinks. There's nothing illegal about it.