Legal News

Jury Nullifcation Advocate: Legal Protester or Criminal?

By Ashby Jones

If someone stands outside a federal court, day after day, telling would-be jurors to ignore the law if they don’t agree with it,  might that be considered a federal crime?

Apparently federal prosecutors in New York think so, according to this story in Friday’s NYT.

Federal prosecutors recently indicted a 78-year-old man named Julian Heicklen, who had spent the better part of the last two years outside the federal courthouse in lower Manhattan and other courthouses telling jurors to “render verdicts based on conscience.” The charge: jury tampering. According to the story, Heicklen is set to appear in court on Friday for a conference in his case.

Heicklen told the NYT that he never tries to influence specific jurors or cases, and instead gives his brochures to passers-by, hoping that jurors are among them.

Prosecutors declined to comment on his case, as did  a lawyer who was assigned to assist Heicklen.

He said he has nothing against laws against violent crime, but is not a fan of drug and gambling laws.

So how’s the case likely to unfold?

"This is classic political advocacy," said Christopher T. Dunn, associate legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, to the NYT. "Unless the government can show that he's singling out jurors to influence a specific verdict, it's squarely protected by the First Amendment, and they should dismiss the case."

On the other hand, Daniel C. Richman, a former prosecutor who teaches criminal law at Columbia, said the government does indeed have a compelling interest here — keeping intact the integrity of the jury process. "The government has to walk a fine First Amendment line bringing these charges," he said, "but lawless jury behavior is certainly of concern to it, too."

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on February 25, 2011 (boomark / email).