<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Guilty Again!  By Reason of Insanity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.askdrjones.com/in-the-media/guilty-again-by-reason-of-insanity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.askdrjones.com/in-the-media/guilty-again-by-reason-of-insanity/</link>
	<description>Ask Dr. Jones</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 21:48:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pam P.</title>
		<link>http://www.askdrjones.com/in-the-media/guilty-again-by-reason-of-insanity/#comment-7961</link>
		<dc:creator>Pam P.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Mar 2006 00:56:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.askdrjones.com/?p=55#comment-7961</guid>
		<description>Using logic, a decision of "jury nullification" should have been made.  The defendant obviously is 'guilty by reason of insanity'.  The following ruling is only one of many cases where jury nullification has been used.  "If a jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic of passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision." (US vs Moylan, 417 F 2d 1002, 1006 (1969))
The jury should have been instructed by the judge that nullification was an option. However, rarely will a judge inform a jury of this option.  The Juror's Guide at www.fija.org is worth reading.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Using logic, a decision of &#8220;jury nullification&#8221; should have been made.  The defendant obviously is &#8216;guilty by reason of insanity&#8217;.  The following ruling is only one of many cases where jury nullification has been used.  &#8220;If a jury feels that the law under which the defendant is accused, is unjust, or that exigent circumstances justified the actions of the accused, or for any reason which appeals to their logic of passion, the jury has the power to acquit, and the courts must abide by that decision.&#8221; (US vs Moylan, 417 F 2d 1002, 1006 (1969))<br />
The jury should have been instructed by the judge that nullification was an option. However, rarely will a judge inform a jury of this option.  The Juror&#8217;s Guide at <a href="http://www.fija.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.fija.org</a> is worth reading.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Battle</title>
		<link>http://www.askdrjones.com/in-the-media/guilty-again-by-reason-of-insanity/#comment-7960</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Battle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Feb 2006 15:30:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.askdrjones.com/?p=55#comment-7960</guid>
		<description>The husband and others who withheld medical care are the ones who should be charged.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The husband and others who withheld medical care are the ones who should be charged.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
