• pohart@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        This wasn’t nullification. The sandwich throw clearly isn’t assault. No crime was committed here.

        Clearly the other two were crimes. I’m skeptical they have the right guy for either, but I haven’t seen the evidence and the jury will.

          • pohart@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            13 days ago

            IANAL and I’m not real clear on DC law but I think the argument was that Mr ice felt like he was being attacked because of the sandwich, not that the sandwich was causing real harm. So even though there was contact the throwing of the sandwich was a threat, making it assault.

    • Gates9@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      16 days ago

      It’s actually pretty insane that this has happened, what, twice now in only a few weeks, both cases related to the fed occupations. I can’t even remember the last time an acquittal like this happened before that, though I don’t follow this stuff closely. I think OJ is the last one I’m aware of but that’s obviously a totally different situation. I was definitely expecting s different outcome, but good for him. I remember in the video they called him “Superman”, lol. I guess so!

    • tamal3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      16 days ago

      My education is in the works. Is this actually an example of jury nullification? Like, what he did was actually illegal, but the jury presumably, thought the law was unjust? Or is throwing a sandwich at ICE just not illegal?

      • Inucune@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        16 days ago

        He threw an object in hostility at a (supposed) federal employee, which could be assault. Jury said no, because they can.