The consequences of that choice are enormous. Confessions and evidence seized in violation of our constitutional rights would be routinely admitted at trial. The exclusionary rule would lose most, if not all, of its ameliorative effect. As a prosecutor, I have reservations about the sweep of the exclusionary rule as applied in our courts today, but I am not yet ready for the courts to abdicate their role in determining the law in favor of piecemeal interpretation of the constitution by juries in individual cases. Jury nullification is the antithesis of those virtues.
Jury nullification can only work to undermine confidence in our system of justice.
The rule of law and jury nullification are inherently incompatible. To choose one is to forsake the other. I vote for the rule of law, warts and all. Jr. Seattle Readers are invited to submit letters of reasonable length to the editor. They should be typed on letterhead, signed and, if possible, also provided on disk in any conventional format.