Lawyer Reacting to "The Law You Won't Be Told."
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 09. 2024
- #personalinjurylawyer #jurynullification #juryduty
"The Law You Won't Be Told" is a famous video about jury nullification. In today's video, I am reacting to said video....GO TO JURY DUTY PEOPLE IT IS IMPORTANT.
Original video from @CGPGrey : • The Law You Won't Be Told
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the personal video blog of personal injury lawyer Tommy John Kherkher.
Link to My Other Social Media Channels:
beacons.page/a...
Biography:
Personal Injury Attorney Tommy John Kherkher
Managing Partner of The Kherkher Law Firm PLLC | Attorney at Kherkher Garcia LLP
Principal office is in Houston, Texas. Licensed in Texas(see below).
Primarily focused on representing individuals who have suffered catastrophic and high-damage personal injuries.
Website: www.attorneytom.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair Use: All clips used for fair use commentary, criticism, and educational purposes. See Hosseinzadeh v. Klein, 276 F.Supp.3d 34 (S.D.N.Y. 2017); Equals Three, LLC v. Jukin Media, Inc., 139 F. Supp. 3d 1094 (C.D. Cal. 2015).
I do not own the music or unoriginal underlying graphics in this video.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER:
This content is the property of Attorney Tom, LLC. Anything stated on ANY form of media, either expressly or implied, is not legal advice, nor can Attorney Tom, LLC, Attorney Tommy John Kherkher, Kherkher Law Firm, PPLC, or Kherkher Garcia LLP give you legal advice. Unless otherwise stated in the specific video referenced, The Kherkher Law Firm, PLLC | Kherkher Garcia, LLP is not advertising the services and products it offers. This content, unless otherwise disclaimed, was not prepared to secure paid professional employment.
Nothing here should be construed to form an attorney-client relationship. Nor is there intent to form a lawyer-client relationship when interacting with others on the internet and in social media outlets. Past performance talked about in any context is no guarantee of future results.
Full disclaimer located at attorneytom.co...
AttorneyTom: “I should steal that”
Judge: “ *so what did you mean by that* “
Also Tom: "Don't record yourself doing crimes."
Ladies and gentlemen, we got him.
Except the disclaimer says “CGPGrey is not a lawyer,” so if he stole that and changed it to his name, it wouldn’t be correct, because he is literally a lawyer.
I was about to talk about this
Lol, when he said that I said, “ironic”
"I don't make up the facts, I simply arrange them in the most convenient way "
😂😂😂
Lawyers in a nutshell
CNN when they actually have facts.
Power of statistics.
@@rogue6827 This is why they are called 'legal wizards'. Given enough preparation, they can turn laws into....whatever they want.
your "Karen does jury duty" is the best argument for getting people into jury duty
No cap, once im old enough ima either a. Find an excuse to not go and if I do gotta go. Think about the karens
Absolutely true. Why are HOA's typically so terrible? Because they're typically run by the kinds of people who *enjoy* getting involved in other people's business and wielding petty amounts of power (i.e. Karens). Those same kinds of people love jury duty because it gives them power over other people. If you don't want a jury of petty HOA presidents deciding cases with massive impacts on people's lives, go to jury duty.
It's the best argument for getting rid of jurors altogether and have a panel of judges instead.
In my experience, people who show up for jury duty are usually retirees, teachers, and government workers. Maybe 10-15% wouldn't fall into one of these categories.
@@MatthewHarrisLawPLLC isn’t it illegal to not show up for jury duty?
Truth. The very first time I was ever, ever called for Jury Duty just so happened to be a drive-by shooting case in a residential neighborhood that resulted in the death of a minor from stray bullet fire. The prosecution was firmly seeking the death penalty, and I was in a room with 400 strangers that had also been called to Jury Duty to fill-in a comprehensive questionnaire to determine my eligibility as a juror.
No one ever wants to do Jury Duty, but if you do, you always hope its for something like a traffic violation or a civil dispute... I was not too pleased my first time ever was a capitol murder offense. This was even more scary to me because my dad had been a Juror on a major murder trial before, and he warned me that if I were to be picked for a case this big, I would also probably be sequestered for the duration of the trial as he had been.
Fortunately, I had good reason at the time to be disqualified for Jury selection. At that time, I had no faith in the justice system whatsoever (Still kind of don't) because I had a brother who was a former CFO that was now serving 4 years in prison for a white collar wire fraud crime he didn't commit because he was facing 20 years in prison if he didn't take the prosecutions plea deal.
Plea deals send more innocent men to prison than the Spanish inquisition.
You know you don't have to take the plea deal. You make that conscience decision to forego your rights to a fair trial in the hopes of getting a shorter sentence than if you were convicted. You should only take a plea deal if you know you did it or you know that the evidence is so strong only an act of god would prevent a guilty verdict, if you know you didn't do it or the evidence isn't there to support a guilty verdict you absolutely should take your chances
@@skykrow the cops lie until you take the plea deal
@@KaneYork yup they take an oath to the constitution and to lie when it benefits the state
@@skykrow you must be new to America
@@skykrow are you probably tell you this but there are cities and other places that have attacked because they have a thing against these people or they just want to close this case will lie and falsify evidence to have you made guilty or will even strong-arm you into doing a plea deal some even have been known to lie and make you sign a document not letting you know what it is yes it's very legal but Lucy's places will trips around the law in some weird fashion to try and get someone put away for the crime even if there's absolutely no evidence that they did it in some cases they'll even get evidence thrown out that proves they didn't do it there are many cases like that's the law system is very broken in many many places like if you messed with it anyways unless you have an ironclad setup or alibi
The big problem with "jury duty is important" is that the legislatures do not treat it as important. First of all, >10% of Americans would be fired just for serving jury duty (even though it is illegal). Also if you require someone to be there you need to pay them at least minimum wage (civic duty or not these are people still need to eat). When the government starts treating jury duty as "important" the citizens might also.
Totally fair. Also is it too much to ask for a text telling us when we have a vote coming up? I’m an informed voter but there seem to be so many surprise votes that sneak up during the year. Just wish I had a warning!
What do you mean when you say >10%? Because that means anywhere between 10% and 100%, and that's a huge margin.
@@DolusVulpes Hard to get actually numbers for crimes not reported. Estimates range by a lot. Ask ANY minimum wage worker if they can get time off for jury duty. They may not get "fired" but they may get scheduled for 2 hours a week forever. If the govt. took jury duty seriously employers would be punished for punishing workers who do jury duty and PAY jurors a reasonable amount.
@@billtwok6864 be that as it may, it's impossible for the margin to actually be 10% to 100%, because 100% is literally everyone, and if it were any kind of majority then it would almost certainly be seen as a much larger issue.
@@DolusVulpes Have you spoken English very long? Greater than 10 % means just that it is over 10%. Nobody thinks it means close to 85%. What are you talking about?
“If you don’t do Jury Duty, Karen will.” -Attorney Tom
This is now officially my argument to get my friends and acquaintances to stop trying to get out of Jury Duty.
Does anyone ever successfully do that? When I went to the first step of jury duty the judge heard thirty or fifty people ask to be excused and he turned all of them down except the one dumb lady who didn't read that as the sole care taker of her children that were under age she couldn't serve.
@@zadinal, yes. I know A LOT of people who successfully get out of Jury Duty.
Either by claiming hardship (for work) or purposely answering questions in such a way that will get them dismissed from service.
@@junior3dc they couldn't get out of the first phase so they'd have to lie on the second phase of jury selection for my area. Hardship can be done with some forms, you don't have to show to phase one
As a Military Veteran who has not completely made up his mind politically, but supports Police, I will not be able to server Jury duty as I have reasonable bias.
@@rabidseabee7229, mind elaborating? Why would a pro-police stance make you ineligible from ever serving Jury Duty?
Still need Tom to discuss the legality of the ATF refusing to tell someone whether or not something was legal.
He likes his youtube channel, He wouldn't want it to become another youtube warzone !!
@@SuperDinoboy2000 I feel as if it is simple logic that the government should tell citizens what is legal and what is not, and idealls clarify before a court case even happens if it is unclear.
This doesn't seem like something controversial.
@@sakaue I agree. It should at least be easily accessible information, considering that ignorance of the law is not a valid defense in court.
Are you trying to get your dog killed Shawn.
Is your dog sick or something lol
My last jury duty that I went to was a really frustrating experience. It showed me that language comprehension has gone downhill.
We first get in, DUI case. The judge asks "How many of you all would want to hear what this man has to say?", referring to the defendant. I raised my hand, because if he said something, I would want to hear what it was he had to say. I took the question as just that and nothing else. The judge must have thought the question SOUNDED like it was phrased well *in his head.* What he was ACTUALLY getting at was how many of us feel the defendant SHOULD testify. The county prosecutor and defense attorney were noting who raised their hands for this question.
Later on, the defense attorney asked if we thought the defendant SHOULD BE COMPELLED to testify, and I didn't raise my hand.
During individual questioning, she tried to tell me that I contradicted myself, and I had to EXPLAIN TO HER that what the judge SAID and what he MEANT were two completely different things.
That sounds purposefully engineered to trip people up. Any half conscious person working in law knows exactly what they did there. I can't tell you exactly what their end goal was there but it was definitely to get you to "contradict" yourself.
I don't understand, what's the difference between the two?
@@AMalas Compulsory speech vs the general desire to hear what someone is going to say (a desire is not the same as something that compels someone not holding that desire).
@@evannibbe9375 hm, I understood "should be compelled" to just mean "not be silenced", I dont know why that's what I thought
@@LaneVermilion So... You are saying THE JUDGE was in on asking a question that would make less logical people think I was contradicting myself with the defense attorney's question.
I would think it's more likely that the judge just thought his question sounded correctly phrased, and he was wrong.
I got called for jury duty on the same day that I had an appointment with a psychiatrist due to depression. I sent the letter showing the appointment to the Court to ask to come on another day. I got a letter back saying I was permanently excused from jury duty.
why would they do that
@@positive2772 they don’t want anyone with potential mental disorders to serve as a juror. It will affect their ruling. A psychiatrist indicates it’s a serious issue where a therapist would not.
See my comments.
@@dennishickey7194 AGREED!!! SAVE AMERICA! LETS GO BRANDON
@@pxinful.8497 Looks like you need to be permanently banned from jury duty for the same reason listed above.
Friend of mine had a jury made up of people who didnt want to be there.
He was thankfully able to get a retrial after several members of the jury admitted they just voted guilty because they hadnt been paying attention, and 'arent getting paid to care'.
It was some sketchy ass shit, and his court appointed lawyer was worthless the whole time.
I remember sitting in the front row, waiting to be called as a character witness, and his court appointed attorney was playing candy crush while the prosecution gave statements, and questioned another witness.
Female lawyers 😂
@@radthadd huh?
It was a ude. Just remember assholes go to hell
@@radthaddbro is so gay
@@radthaddidiot
12 Karen's in jury duty oh hell fucking no
That would be my luck.
Good thing im not a criminal
@@jakehildebrand1824 accused even if innocent.
@@jakehildebrand1824 thats what a criminal would say
All because of a pickle
They wouldnt even let the judge talk
Finally found a CZcams lawyer to react to this video
Probably because there's not much to add. Gray does his research and his video was correct so Tom had to just sit there and nod.
Ok
@@pafnutiytheartist yeah and I put good money that if Tom hadn't had his own experience with it then I bet he never would have made it
@@pafnutiytheartist Not much to add, but he explains it well.
See my comments.
Tom uploading is like getting a stimulus check for your brain
Tom is like putting crack in your coffee in the morning. Refreshing!
@@itszeyth9863 I prefer just a little coffee in my crack but each to their own
Late, under promised, and not enough for what I need?
@@duckmeat4674 also just a small cut of the money you paid to the government, especially compared to the foreign aid budget.
Monke react
“Would you put your life in the hands of 12 people who weren’t smart enough to get out of jury duty?”
Don’t break the law kids
🤣🤣😆😆
On principle, I'd rather be judged by 12 people who couldn't get out of it than 12 people who thought getting out of it was better than doing it.
@@icantthinkofaname8139 I just hate jaywalkers!
@@wcookiv Ya keep saying that until you see half the jury that shows up is Karen's and the other half is a bunch of slobs in pajamas.
The way juries work needs to change if they want people to be OK with serving. People need to be fairly compensated for their time, there are a lot of people who just can't afford to take that time basically unpaid.
pretty sure you just nailed why they dont want to fairly compensate juries.
I don't want to be there even if the shit payed a fucking $100 a hour.
@@waynepurcell6058 You know who wants to be there? Karen.
@@waynepurcell6058 why not? $100 an hour sounds like a pretty good gig.
@@waynepurcell6058well, that's more for the rest of us. I'd take it for $100/hr
I would go to jury duty for 2 reasons: 1 it sounds kind of interesting. 2 it might be Tom's case, who knows
Think that would be grounds for juror dismissal
@@Thatoneguy-vd8ge could you explain please, i don't really see a problem with being interested in being involved in the legal system
@@wolfslash1799 The first claim is fine. There is nothing wrong with finding the system interesting. The second claim is the problem as it would imply a direct bias because of the involvement of a particular lawyer. You would not be able to safely say that a juror who has a favorite is going to be impartial.
@@Thatoneguy-vd8ge that makes a lot of sense, thank you. However I wouldn't pay enough attention to know beforehand, I am simply interested in the system.
It sucks tbh
Oh look a new favorite content creator reviewing an old favorite content creator
My nana was on jury duty once for a guy who sold meth or something to kids. And half way through one of the guys in the jury said that he believes that only god can choose if someone is guilty or not. They had to postpone the whole case and get a new jury.
(Edit)
I asked my mom about it and it turns out that He ruined a big drug bust.
I've never been in the Juror pool where one of the lawyers didn't ask about that: "does anyone here believe they cannot sit in judgment of another person?"
I think that JW cannot, but surely there are some others - some ppl might even just personally believe that.
Lmaooo
Dear gods....
Capital He in your edit suggests that god himself ruined the big drug bust lol
@@ryantaylor8952 God dammit, God...
I am excited for the new film "12 angry Karens"
Next book, "Karen Kills a Mockingbird."
You know, reading your comment like that, it occurs to me that that's basically the premise of that movie except that it's 11 Karens who are trapped in a room with a guy who uses restraint and reason.
Haha
I stumbled across the concept quite naturally during a jury selection process wherein I was a potential juror. When the judge asked us If there was anyone present who might might have a problem agreeing with the final decision if supported by law. I asked, what if I don't agree with said law? He then asked me " Do you hold any convictions which might supersede the law?" I replied, of course, doesn't everybody? I was summarily excused from jury duty.
So, would the sentencing and death of Socrates be the first known case of jury nullification?
Probably the first recorded case, yes
AttorneyTom: There are some people who just can't fathom 10's of millions of dollars for damages.
Me: can't fathom what 10's of millions of dollars even looks like
I can, living in my way of what I think luxury is, for longer period of time than USA existed as a country.
(70 000$ a year for 500 years = 35 million, ergo 10s of millions)
10 million dollars is enough to get a $5,000 monthly interest pay check (pre tax) solely from 5bps interest.
@@KaneYork
Too bad most banks don't pay interest on any amount anywhere near $10M
@@TheRedAzuki Hope you live 500 years
10's of millions of dollars is the price of a large rollercoaster.
> Jury duty is so important
If it was actually that important, there would be a law saying that your employer had to pay you for your time on a jury without using your sick days. My choice was being able to pay rent, or *not*, and my landlord wasn’t going to accept “grand jury duty” as an excuse. The judge understood, so unfortunately I couldn’t serve.
Legally your job cannot punish you for jury duty, nor can they force you to use sick days or vacation days
@@skykrow but nothing says that they have to pay me for the time that I’m on jury duty. If I wanted to pay my bills, I would have had to use PTO. I certainly did for the few days I did go, to sit through jury selection. Sure, they can’t officially punish me, but they don’t have to lift a finger for the lack of income to be punishment enough.
Was called for jury duty once, the state of South Carolina paid me for my time and employer was totally cool with it. So I'm assuming milage may vary depending on where you live.
@@casualdreamer8543 They pay you tens of dollars, usually far less than the money you would have earned on your job.
It's not your employer's responsibility to pay you to go to jury duty. However the state should compensate you for your time and your employer can't force you to use sick leave or PTO, or cut your hours in retaliation.
AttorneyTom: “Imagine you’re the defendant. Do you want 12 Karens as your jury?
Me: * internally screaming in terror *
As it stands, the US justice system IS a Karen. It's all too often content with making someone, anyone, pay and pay dearly rather than elucidate the actual facts of the case and impose consequences that do justice without breeding more injustice.
only if your case is against a manager
I feel like the "do you have any beliefs that might prevent you from making a decision based strictly on the law?" would be an automatic yes for me. The law isn't always just or created in a democratic manner.
For real. He says he wants an even playing field like it’s a game. It’s not just about lawful and unlawful, it’s also about if what you did was morally wrong.
That question doesn’t even rule out jury nullification, which is the logical conclusion of the relevant amendments, literally the highest law in the US.
Democratic has nothing to do with if a law is right or wrong.
@@JanBruunAndersen I mean the peoples morality is pretty much the base line. What else would you use to decide what is right and wrong?
My answer would be no. There might be a statute on the books, but be unconstitutional.
If someone is being charged with an unconstitutional crime I WANT to be there to nullify it.
I’m actually concerned that i am 30 and have never received a summons, my husband of the same age only received 1.
I'm 28 and I've been selected 3 times to report for jury duty before I was 24. I always got a handy check for $30 instead of having to work for $8/ hr.
I got my first and so far only Jury summons when I was 20/21. I first got it while I was in college but that wasn’t in the area so I was able to file a request that postponed the summons until the summer.
When I got it again in the summer however I ended up being in a later group that wasn’t called in at the start of the week and would only be called in if they went through the earlier groups. But I guess they got all the jurors they needed for that week because I was never called in.
Was kind of disappointed by that even though I’ve been told many times that actual jury duty tends to be very boring.
I was selected for jury duty within one year of becoming a citizen
I received a summons the instant I turned 18 lol, it was very strange
I'm also 30 and have received two here in Ohio, for different levels of courts.
I complied both times and would have happily served, but ultimately, I was never selected and never even had to go to the courthouse.
I will never get the image of tom dancing in a dino outfit out of my head
“They have total power over somebody’s life”
Which is terrifying to me and I cannot handle the that kind of power, it makes me anxious just to think about. And yet I still get summoned...
Well, 1/12 power anyway haha.
I'd argue that people that always conscious of the consequences of their power is worthy of that power. It's better than getting drunk on it. So yeah, I think they made the right choice.
The question of "is there anything preventing you from making a decision based solely on the law" is an interesting one to me. I believe no one is capable of making a decision based solely on external factors, whether the law or the facts or pure logic. Unconscious bias is in all of us, and I believe it influences every decision we make. I consider it better to acknowledge that and try to plan accordingly than to attempt to ignore our biases.
Would I get thrown out of jury selection? 😆
I agree. Anyone who says they can make an unbiased decision is either a liar, not fully self aware, or neurodivergent because that's not neurotypical behavior.
There are people in the world that see things only as black and white, people who see things in a billion shades of grey, and people everywhere between those two extremes.
I've been through a jury selection. I remember a Karen being a Karen and getting removed. I also remember a cop being removed because it might be difficult to objectively judge testimony from a fellow cop.
Fascinating stuff.
That look when you realized the “bad faith” thing
I mean, the church only promises faith, it doesn't say what kind of faith...
@@SimonBuchanNz ahahah 10/10
It's a church. It's all bad faith.
Jury nullification, the reason every user agreement has you wave your right to jury trial in any dispute.
Which is why California makes more such parts of agreements void (and why the ToS generally have a separate section on your rights if you live in California).
@@evannibbe9375 I have to look into that. I haven't seen a California exception in any TOS so far. Then again, with how long those damn things are I probably just missed it. However, every goddamn doctor's visit in California forces me to sign an agreement to arbitration before the doctor will see me. Shit like that makes me think forced arbitration should just be outlawed.
@@CreepyUncleIdjit this reminds me of products in stores that reference California's prop 23 saying "this product is known to the state of California to cause cancer". It's written like only people in California know or should know it causes cancer. Extremely crazy to see
@@Kharsonist I think the implication is that California's threshold of “carcinogenic” is too strict compared to the rest of the world. Whether or not that’s true, I’m assuming that’s the subtext in specifying “California”.
@@Kharsonist Prop 23 isn't really about whether something could or could not cause cancer. It's a vote that people in California have where the voters decide what gets placed on Prop 23. It's not that only people in California know or should know, it's that people in California *say* it does. Basically, it's a popularity (or un-popularity) contest.
On the note about choosing to not be injured vs getting money. My shoulder got messed up in the military. Its been 16 years. I'm in pain all the time. No way to fix it so that I will be in no pain except maybe cut my arm off, the thought has crossed my mind. Either way I get disability from the VA. I would rather have my shoulder back instead of the money and free medical. I can't even exercise unless I want to be drugged up all the time because it affects my neck and back when my muscles get tensed.
That's tough man, hope you get it sorted out at some point.
Even amputation won't save you. Lots of amputees get "phantom pains"
@@youraveragegamer8832 Why is that in ""?
@@papasscooperiaworker3649 I don't know if it's an actual term or not, but that's what people call them
I'd spent much of my life excited about the idea that some day I might be called to serve on a jury because I saw that as downright central to the form of freedom that we've established in our culture. That said, when I was given a notice that I was being summoned to the first step of the jury selection process, I got several letters about it and every last one of them repeated multiple times that if I did anything to try to dodge them, they'd put me in prison. After a couple of those letters, I was so done with being threatened and pushed around that I wound up pretty happy not to get selected. Constantly restating their willingness to punish me despite the fact that I was initially excited to do my bit is way more bad to me personally than the concept of a jury trial is good. Now I did qualify that with "personally" rather than objectively, but with the way they write those letters, it was just stressful to even think about it, rather than feeling like the privilege it technically is.
Because jury duty is a farce. What document did you sign to initiate this process? Start there.
The law doesn’t care about your enthusiasm. It’s there to enact justice, not to be fun.
@@dbgvideos6133 The problem is that for a long trial the law can literally result in someone being homeless. Most place jury duty pays minimum wage. I won't go into the details, but in some states it is easy for someone to be fired for an illegal reason and not see a dime even if they win in court.
So, it's entirely possible for Jury duty to result in someone not being able to pay their bills.
"A Jury of twelve people is the strongest, most complete form of government."
I'll have my triumvirate of judges, thank you.
Triumvirate is technically only composed of 3 people.
@@mortak6307 I know that. And it is how courtcases in my country are decided.
@@ArfurFaulkesHake which one may i ask?
@@chillinchum Germany
Umm yeah but have you seen the judges we are hiring on this side of the pond we are f'd
"I should steal that!"
-AttorneyTom
I never thought I would hear a lawyer say that XD
I got called for jury duty and was actually happy to do it. The process fascinates me. I was disappointed to get dismissed shortly after arriving.
I guess they settled just before trial
that happened to me twice.
Got on a civil trial. The one side asked their first witness two questions, the other side made an objection, and we were led out of the room. An hour and a half later, we were led back in, told that we heard “a bell that cannot be unrang” in that second answer, and so he declared a mistrial and dismissed us. Worst is that I didn’t get the card of the second lawyer, just in case.
@@Egilhelmson do you remember what the question he asked was?
I was called too unfortunately at the time, and still, am in college so I didn't have the ability. I obviously wouldn't like to serve but I have no obejections to serving
I look forward to being called for jury duty one day
I missed it, you should do the one where that law professor comes out saying that you should never say anything to the police, it's an hour long though...
Whoever said that, they're not wrong. Our rights are there to protect the innocent. I've been told by every attorney that I ever had as a professor to always ALWAYS exercise my right to remain silent and not to speak to anyone in law enforcement without my attorney present. I take that advice to heart, as it's probably wise.
He’s said not to talk to the police before
I can't tell if you're saying it like it's a bad thing to use your 5th amendment right.
Only if you're a scumbag or guilty. Why not help the police catch criminals if you've got info that they'd benefit from?
@@Majora96 because cops aren’t here to help everyday normal people.
A level playing field is informing your jury of all options.
People can and have been arrested "simply for talking about jury notification". This has happened when people have attempted to inform people going into a court building of the existence of jury nullification. The charge cited was jury tampering. In 2015 in Michigan a jury nullification activist was convicted of jury tampering for doing this, although the conviction was overturned on appeal.
I would 100% nullify a case against a parent killing their child's abuser for example.
Yeah, that happened one time, I can't recall the guy's name, but it was a human trafficking case in louisiana, and he killed his son's abuser
nice pfp and username
Very valid! I agree.
Same.
Or decide not guilty. If they killed the abuser to protect their kid it could be ruled not guilty.
OMG CGP GREY-
Imagine sacrificing your 20s to build an empire on your law degree and then end up considering retirement because shitposting on youtube is more fun.
dont know why you would think this is a shitpost channel but sure
@@pomless2639 considering how seriously other lawyers on youtube take themselves, I'd say he's a shitposter in comparison. I mean, have you seen his big bubba trial update video? Pure comedy gold.
Why not be a lawyer and "shitpost on youtube". As this chanel is making him more known.
Yeah, I'm just going to ignore the replies. I have a feeling more disagreeable fudds are going to pour in like a cancerous no-fun plague.
@@itszeyth9863 likely so
Honestly, this is the only kind of 'reaction' media that I'll consume. I like how he expands on the video to give context, facts, and personal experience. What a guy.
My only complaint about the time I was called for jury duty is that the prosecutor and defense attorneys both KNEW that I was disqualified to be on that jury I was still forced to show up and sit through everything. The wasting of my time really peeved me off.
I used to love jury duty. There were coffee, donuts, and undeliverable magazines from the post office.😍You could drink coffee and read all day while waiting to be selected. Now none of that. Not even vending machines.😟 I still go, but your bored all day long. I get called about every two years. Joking aside, I find it educational. My sister said standup and start screaming guilty!
Fry them all!! You’ll never get another jury notice. 😂😂
I've been of age for about 15 years now and it's always frustrating to me that everyone else wants to get out of jury duty but I, someone who actually wants to participate in community government like his, have never been selected.
And then everyone clapped
@@tparadox88 I have no idea how they determine who gets picked for jury duty. My parents were never summoned and my sister only once. I’ve been to circuit and federal court. Everything you see on tv is fake. Courts don’t work that way. You could set in on a few cases and see how our justice works. Most court rooms are open to everyone. Now with Covid-19 no jury cases are held, at least in my area.
@@Ninja-Mama I think there's some other demographic info but if you're registered to vote, you're supposedly in the pool.
The amenities available depends on the courthouse. I did Jury Duty in the city when I was young and there was nothing, the waiting room was spartan, you had to get lunch at a food truck, etc. but recently I did jury duty in a more affluent area and the waiting room had relatively nice seats, a quiet library which had speakers for calling names and free wifi, a cafe...
This was only like 20 miles apart.
I love watching cgp gray and I love watching actual knowledgeable people react to his videos!
I always thought the Jury nullification video was pretty good but happy to see a deep dive on it
Tom, you completely missed the entire point that jury nullification is a tool by the people to protest unjust laws. You shouldn't focus on that whole fair between the lawyers given the facts when we're talking about the rights of the people being hidden, silenced, and manipulative questions being asked to the point to where we basically can't exercise the right to nullify without being in a catch-22 for punishment or dismissal.
Holy shit THANK YOU! I was praying someone brought this up.
You can always lie, and if the case is on a law you disagree with you could just do it anyway, if they ask why you said no, you can always just lie again, they can't prove that you knew beforehand. "Oh I just didn't think it was right that his life should be ruined for a petty drug possession charge when there's much worse people out there, like cops."
Also its good thing things like
A man beats someone to death
Who was raping his daughter when he walked in the room.
Dudes 100% guilty of homocide
But no reasonable person would say he should go to jail for it
@@matthewdowns9822 well that’s a self defense case and a fully legal killing, so long as the guy he killed wasn’t out of the fight at any point. Self defense does not mean you get to execute somebody on the ground.
@@derekeastman7771 drpends on the state or country, but my point is in the case where the dad dose take the guy out of the fight but keeps punching him till he dies, most people would be sympathetic to him and not want him to go to jail for it
3:02
"I should steal that."
-Tom the Attorney
The antithesis to "12 Angry Men": "12 Angry Karens" 😁
Yup. Jury nullification. Saw that coming a mile away. It’s the outcome of literally every episode of Boston Legal
Had jury duty and ended up being on grand jury which isn’t as glamours as it sounds. Worked over 520 cases and saw a lot of pictures and videos. 2 weeks of just pure evidence review. Crazy stories too
520???? Dude someday you'll have to tell us all about it, there must be so many crazy stories! 😂😂😂
520???
Dude you can do a lot of good things on a grand jury since you have an unlimited right to investigations. Whenever you hear about some polititian going to prison its usually because someone on the grand jury knew what they were doing.
@@aboxinspace you cant... disclose anything said in side the jury, it is heavily against the law lol thats why its so hard knowing if our juries actually work lol
PS: a social experiment found it so badly does not work (fake jury duty with real judges and lawyers just not. a real case)
This man can recite the Karen jury argument by heart whenever needed.
I can confirm that. Years ago when I was going to be on a rather complicated case, somebody brought it up during selection. The entire court room heard it and nobody else was barred from being on the jury because they heard one guy saying it and refusing to say that he wouldn't do it. This was a civil case, so one juror doing it wouldn't guarantee that the defense would win. And both parties were suing each other. But, you'd definitely be running the risk of being held in contempt of court if the judge thought you were doing it to cause problems in the court.
It's nice to have a video by an expert that pretty much just says "yep, that's correct. well done other youtuber" and adds some of their own experience. Really helps building a web of trust of the CZcamsrs I watch.
If somebody is right about a topic I know about, and an expert agrees with them on another topic - then chances are, that they're right about a topic I know little about, too, which is relieving.
What I'm saying is tumbleweed is a menace.
lets goooooo here for the premiere
dababy premiere
@@haysdixon6227 LESS GOOOOOO
Very cool and respectful way to react to a video. You actually added to the original video (which I have already seen) and gave me more to think about than the original. If all reaction videos were like this one I wouldn’t have a problem with them.
I don't do jury duty anymore.
I wanted to, got called in, murder case, was determined to be too well-educated for the prosecutor....
So basically "this person is too smart and will see through our bs" or something like that?
@@dialga4688 That is likely it, the guy before me was atleast as intelligent as I am and he was dismissed from the jury also.
There's one BIG one that just recently happened, with at least one juror afterward stating that they feared mob retribution. I will not state which one as it is still a fiery, hot-button topic. Those that know, you should also know that the other side will not be convinced 99.9999% of the time and just tune you out.
“That’s a good idea, I should steal that disclaimer.”
Guys we gotta keep an eye on him
Thanks for teaching me how to get out of the duty. "I cant fathom doing that." But honestly, without joking, thank you for allowing me a way to not have to ever judge a man or woman to death. I could never do that.
You would never have had to do that anyway.
@@CarrotConsumer it could happen. Last thing I want is to be on a jury that gives the guilty verdict that leads to execution
@@courtnie97 Depends on where you live. Executions are a very rare thing because it's the most extreme punishment, and many countries/states won't even consider execution at all. In the US, if you live in a state that does execution, every member of the jury has to agree. Even one dissenting vote results in a "hung jury."
@@aeonreign6456 It also doesn't stop new crimes, contrary to popular believe crimes are done based on the likelyhood of getting caught, not the harshness of the punishment.
Personally to me it just feels like revenge. There is a valid argument to be made that the penalty saves tax money but if you really care about taxes you should be thinking about mass incarceration and the war on drugs, the effect of the execution on taxes is a drop on the ocean in comparison.
Actually, death sentence costs more than life without parole.
I'd love to serve on a jury. Unfortunately the 3 times I've been called up for jury duty the cases have been about things where I couldn't be fair and impartial. All three were domestic violence cases and with only knowing just that fact, I knew it would bias my decision toward whomever is perceived to be victimized because of growing up in a household with domestic violence on the daily.
I knew that if I had been accused of domestic violence, and I truly hadn't done anything but the other person made it look like I had, I wouldn't want someone like me on my jury deciding my fate because my knee-jerk reaction is "guilty af for laying a hand on that person" rather than objectively listening to the facts and deciding for myself if the person was being wrongfully accused.
People say I'm just using that to get out of jury duty, but to me it's the single most important civic duty anyone can perform for the justice system, I just only seem to get called up for the same kind of stuff every time.
Glad you can see your own emotional flaws and can act accordingly to make sure they don’t cause problems. Wish more people had the same introspective nature as you
I'd be interested in hearing what Tom thinks of the "not proven" verdict some countries use.
As in, the prosecutor can retry with more evidence?
I think the way to do that here in the U.S. in criminal cases is to have one person decide the other way, resulting in a hung jury and sending the case to a new trial.
@@evannibbe9375 No, generally it's not that if I'm not mistaken. At least in Scotland in the past, they used "not proven" instead of "not guilty" but it was functionally the same. At some point, it switched to "not guilty".
@@seneca983 Yeah, from what Wikipedia says the old Scot system simply had "case proven" (aka "guilty") or "case not proven"; but one jury essentially committed nullification by aquitting a "proven" defendant due to apparent extenuating circumstances, thus creating the "not guilty" verdict.
The justice system should be about justice, not so much the law.
As we know, laws have a history of being unjust.
And I ask you, is the price of incarcerating good people to incarcerate bad people worth it?
However, it is not the judicial branch's job to judge if a law is unjust in general. Or to fix the law if that is the case. Their job is to judge the case before them according to the law as it is written and according to other legal precident recorded in certain established case law. Such as prior decisions handed down by the Supreme Court. The court's expectation of the jury is naturally the same. Even if the jury does have the power to decide however they want.
It is the job of the state and fedral legislatures to fix unjust laws and design a code of law that provides proper freedoms, protects justice and punishes only those who are guilty of committing injustices. The courts cannot and should not be doing this.
At least in America this is what responsibility is held by which branch of government. Even if it is commonly thought of as such, America's justice system consists of more than just the courts. All three branches of the fedral government as well as the state governments have explicit roles to play in the justice system. The US constitution explicitly lays this out. Though ultimately the onus is on the American people to uphold justice. Jury nullification allows for this to happen in cases where the law is insufficiently just.
Conversely if the people are currupt and unjust throughout the legislatures, courts and general populace there are no laws or regulations you can make the people or branches of government follow that will always ensure justice is done and only the guilty are punished. And any freedoms enable more and worse damage to be done for longer periods.
I got out of jury duty out of a pool of about 120 people by being the only one who raised my hand when they asked if weed should be legal. Got to love MS!
That leads me to one of the biggest problems I have seen with jury selection and the grand jury process and that is social pressure. I got out of my duty in MS, but when I lived in NJ I did get selected for grand jury duty. Those two experiences have shown me people will not answer things that goes against the crowd. This isn't TOO bad with jury selection, but indicting people via grand jury it is a bigger deal. I was the only person that either voted against or obtained in my 10 weeks on grand jury. Not sure about other states have this but there should be an 'anonymous to group' method of answering things versus raising your hand or answering verbally in front of everyone.
Federal employees get to keep our hourly wage during jury duty. its rad but makes me feel bad for everyone else.
wdym keep ur hourly wage
I love watching someone in the field react to these law related videos!
I see the eyepatch has done it’s job. I guess it’s time for me to get one
It is the right and duty of a common law jury to decide not merely whether someone has broken a law, but whether a crime has been committed. We form juries to protect the people from the tyrannical application of rules and regulations.
In the common law tradition judges later usurped the role of juries, which was to decide what conduct is criminal, and which is not, by their own personal standards. It was juries that made the law, not judges.
"It's so important" so is food and housing. Literally pay me. Force employers to compensate. Anything.
I loved doing jury duty! I was so glad I was picked - both defense and prosecutor wanted to keep me and I might be a little egotistical but I took that as a compliment! We had a Karen and in the first couple hours she made some friends. The more she talked the less friends she had lol I'll tell ya'll about the case sometime. We found 2 defendants Not Guilty. Karen whailed loudly, crying, moaning and groaning through the courthouse following our release. She was the only person who wanted Guilty and she decided to go with the 11 of us.
Can we get a Legal Eagle v. Attorney Tom boxing match soon?
Seeing as legal eagle is a tool and a bad lawyer, I’m hoping for a Legal Eagle vs Anthony Joshua boxing match instead
@@DarranKern Can you explain the part about legal eagle being a tool?
@@DarranKern TRUE
@@bellav9221 I don't know much about him, but I know he's had some pretty shit takes in the past. Like, when that deleted Cpt Marvel scene got released where she nearly broke a dude's arm and stole his bike because he touched her paper map and asked her to smile, LE said that was totally justified and legal and that everyone saying she was in the wrong/had an extremely disproportionate reaction to his actions was completely wrong.
Ive actually always have wanted to be on a jury. Its something that ive been passionate about against my family saying otherwise. Its the way ive wanted to help better and participate in the the modern justice system. I havent been selected though. Sadly
“Has the jury reached a verdict?”
“We have, your honor. We find the defendant: kitty.”
😏
The only jury I was successfully part of was a grand jury, which was incredibly interesting and yet also distressing as fuck. It may have been because of how COVID changed a LOT of things, including the format, but I got 2 weeks where we got a solid workday every other day hearing (and sometimes seeing) a LOT of domestic abuse, sexual assault, and even multiple murders (We were told by prosecutors it was very unusual to have one grand jury see multiple murders and we were just lucky/unlucky). They should offer counseling afterwards to some juries or something
A Church.... Acting in.... *BAD FAITH*
-Attorney Tom 2021
(which is ironic).
-also Attorney Tom, 2021
Only been called once *knock on wood* but beyond a reasonable doubt is something I feel strongly about. “He probably did it” doesn’t fly with me. And although I’d like to serve one day, carrying the weight of a person’s future would be so stressful.
That might be the single best advertisement for doing your civic duty “go to jury duty, because Karen will”
It’s so wild that we do not have workers’ protections for jury duty. Why are we not paid for our time and work? We can lose our jobs (technically illegal, still happens) and have our livelihoods affected by the lack of pay, all over engaging with our civil duties and it shouldn’t be that way.
if you get arrested and charged with jury nullification.. and request a jury trial.. would the whole trial be about the subject that they don't want a jury to know about?
noooooo
the eyepatch is gone
oh he does have a lazy eye
"Go to jury duty."
I would literally be forced onto the streets and starve to death if I miss more than 2 days of work.
Then you can sue the company for wrongful termination because that's illegal af
@@PunkZombie1300 they don't even need to fire me. I make the exact amount that I need to live. Missing one day? I can probably bum money to survive. 2 days? Yeah, I'm missing rent and the landlords here are scummy and I'll be out in a week. If I'm on the street, I can't buy food to prepare myself. I'll have to buy from restaurants that will last a little bit but soon I'll be out of money and be forced to starve.
It's great to hear this from a lawyer's perspective, I appreciate hearing what you say and yes it's important to be a juror! That being said, and I believe you said it yourself, the jury, 12 peers, is literally government defined and I do believe it should be a valid way as a citizen to comment on the laws of the land. Just as CGP grey said it was used by northerners and southerners to comment on the slave trade in their own ways. I don't think it's an accident, as frustrating as it must be to a lawyer, that a jury can legally nullify a law they don't agree with.
10:33 Attorney Tom giving off total Plantiff Attorney energy lol
2:36 That's exactly why I don't like Jury duty- I don't feel comfortable holding that much power over someone.
You absolutely just changed my mind about jury duty. I won't say thank you, but I *will* say that you're probably pretty good at your job!
Nah fr changed my whole outlook on jury duty too
The idea that one of the lawyers in a case should be fighting an uphill battle is 100% as it should be. 10 times out of 10 the prosecution should be fighting an uphill battle.
Prosecution, sure.
But this guy is a civil trial lawyer.
They don't have prosecutors and the only deciding factors that are relevant should be the facts.
The playing field shouldn't be slanted because the jury is a bunch of Karen's or anti Karen's.
In criminal cases, the defendant should definitely almost always seem almost completely guilty or almost completely innocent by the time of the trial, at least assuming that a proper investigation was done.
@@DolusVulpes the real problem with "proper investigations" is limited resources and tunnel vision.
It isn't too hard to make someone seem guilty of they are the only person the police are looking at.
Most police are good people, but the consequences for failure can be catastrophic
@@DolusVulpes "almost" is a problem. He has to be guilty. If he is "almost guilty" then he is Innocent
@@anthonybanderas9930 by the beginning of the trial "almost" is completely fine. It only needs to be "beyond a reasonable doubt" by the *end* of the trial.
Your quote at 3:03 will get you into a trademark law suit.
Only if he follows through.... This doesn't count either, i think its cut and dry fair-use, review exception & education exception.
CPG Gray would need to have a trademark on that whole phrase, which he does not and would not be granted. So no, stealing that disclaimer is perfectly legal.
My jury was not allowed to see the physical evidence ( it was being held back pending a mistrial ruling and new trial where it wouldn't be "fruit of a poisoned tree") They were not allowed to hear from witnesses held above the power to be compelled to do so by a defendant compelled to represent himself. They were not permitted to hear a closing statement from me as I was shouted down by the designated and the presiding prosecutor ( no judge, as she had warned me in private she'd "appoint counsel if I didn't like your behavior". She hadn't mentioned it would be herself and she'd be ordering me to take the stand to witness against myself.)
I had begun to tell the jury that they hadn't followed the law when the uproar from my fellow officers of the court brought an end to it. The jury never got to decide the case with the full knowledge of what the circumstances of tbe process were and their just power to rectify them existed. I might not have even mentioned nullification as an option. I was more concerned with the righting of due process by first making the true workings of the court public. 28 years later it still flys under the radar.
Tom, I appreciate your call to serve as a juror, and I'm considering it. Its against everything in me but you made a great argument.
I’m surprised grey hasn’t filed a copyright claim on this video yet considering what he’s been doing to other channels
huh? what did he do to other channels? which channels?
@@alpha777omega vlogging through history is the most recent one, he makes reaction videos on history videos and gives more information and context and grey almost got their channel deleted because of a couple reaction videos
Say what you want about Grey, he isn't stupid: If you're going to Copyright strike a lawyer, *you better be DAMNED SURE YOU'RE GOING TO WIN.*
@@Delightfully_Bitchy that is also a fair point
I like the idea of peer reviewed explainer videos, I'd support this as a trend.
I think you would have words for S1 E5 of "How to get away with Murder" could you react to that episode?
In my country we have two simple solutions to nullification:
1. Prosecution can appeal a non-guilty verdict just as the defendant can appeal a guilty one
2. We kinda have third option besides guilty or not guilty. "Guilty without punishment". So the verdict is guilty but the court decides that you dont deserve punishment for it
Also we have a different system so we dont have jury's
What country is this?
Be proud to be on JuryDuty! I've been arrested and prosecuted TWICE for crimes I DID NOT DO. Just because of fear.
Does attorney Tom have hexagon lights in the background?!?!
CONSPIRACY.
Tom, can you do a video about process servers? Also do you ever worry about things you say on CZcams being used against you during any of the cases you take?
That’s an interesting worry...hope he sees this!
Take that one to Reddit
12:25 This statement shows a very problematic way of thinking for many people in the legal, political and enforcement field. When it becomes more so a game with a winner and loser rather than a method for holding a functional society.
Yes, this is what I was thinking.
I was called in for jury duty 10 times in 8 years. Each time they asked me one or two questions and that was enough for them to not want me. Apparently people who are educated aren't allowed to serve on juries.
I had a jury duty letter show up a couple months ago. I knew by the questions that I wouldn't be picked. One question was 'have you or anyone you know been in an accident?' -Yes. I rolled a semi and my brother was in a motorcycle accident. Second question, 'have you or anyone you know been sued or have sued?' Type question. Yes. My brother sued the other party and they settled out of court and I was sued by The Mike Morse Law Firm for an accident that their client caused [different accident (I had video evidence to support me)] and my employer settled a few days before trial.