Federal Judge Blisters DEA over Medical MJ

[TheRocketSurgeon]

Unfortunately, they try hard to make sure Juries don't nullify state persecution:

In the past, it was feared that a single judge or panel of government officials may be unduly influenced to follow established legal practice, even when that practice had drifted from its origins. In most modern Western legal systems, however, judges often instruct juries to serve only as "finders of facts", whose role it is to determine the veracity of the evidence presented, the weight accorded to the evidence, to apply that evidence to the law, and to reach a verdict; but not to question the law or decide what it says. Similarly, juries are routinely cautioned by courts and some attorneys not to allow sympathy for a party or other affected persons to compromise the fair and dispassionate evaluation of evidence during the guilt phase of a trial. These instructions are criticized by advocates of jury nullification.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

In a trial, a jury isn't even allowed to see the law they're enforcing; they only get "instructions" from the Judge that include the "elements of the crime", the facts that must be proved for the State to make its case, and these can be worded/skewed any way the Judge would like, often recommended directly by the prosecutor or based off "pattern instructions" in the statute-books. The Jury then becomes a simple computer, saying "was this element met? Yes/No."

It was a judge lying to a jury about the elements required for my conviction (they could not prove their case, so they cheated to remove that element by rewording it into nothingness) that ended up with my exoneration after serving only nine years of my 30. The Jurors had specifically asked for better explanations of the abridged instructions, and the judge told them, "Refer only to my instructions as written."