RE: The Power In Jury Nullification
I personally do not beleive in the people having to power as they have in US legal system; however I do see the advantages in some cases like you mentioned in your post. I'm from the Netherlands and we do not have jury system. In my country it is the laywer who takes more or less the role of the jury. Many cases in which the prosection find someone guilty, the person under trial, is judged not guilty based on all sort of things, including wrong application of the law by the prosecution brought forward by the laywer. I personally like a system with high quality lawyers, as we have in the Netherlands, over a system with a jury who may not know the law, who may not be 100% objective and may be influenced by emotions or whatever non objective view (take for instance OJ Simpson).
Lawyers and judges can never be 100% objective. They all have personal preferences, throughout law-school and their careers. Whether they be conservative or progressive etc, Lawyers and judges are also susceptible to corruption and ignorance, just as jurors are. They are not infallible.
You are correct, however in general, I do beleive in systems of specialist knowing their subjects with independent controllers. In the Netherlands and other countries in Europe we use the referendum system more and more, which turns out to be distructive in my opinion; also a system where the common people have the vote but a large part of them voting without even reading the documents underlying the referendum, ie without being informed. This is however of topic, but shows you my opinion on common people involvement in important topics. Back to law; laywers and judges who are not doing their job right, shall be taking out of their position. In the netherlands we have a legal system allowing all, prosecution as well as lawyer and his/her client to go to the next level of law; at least 2 or 3 levels of courts we have in our system, for any kind of crime. In this way any bad performing judge or laywer can be overruled in the next level.
The jury is supposed to be the community tempering the authority of government while offering their own knowledge of the facts and individuals involved in a dispute. It has been corrupted by the State into a rubber stamp for the government case.
We've had two referendums,
One about a European constitution( or how do you call it) and the people where against that, two years later minister president signed the treaty of Lisbon. (the treason of Lisbon) By which they ignored the wishes of the people two years earlier.
The second was the Ukraine referendum and again the politicians worked around the "no"
Now the wanna get rid of referendums altogether.
And by the way all referendums are not binding only advise.
quote// In this way any bad performing judge or laywer can be overruled in the next level.//
You mean his judgement can be overruled? Not that the judge who did the "bad judgement"is going to be laid off? Toch?