陪审团永远不会知道的那些事：英语精读讲义

On a jury, you know your options: guilty or not.

在陪审团中，你知道你的选项：有罪或无罪。

But there's another choice that neither the judge nor the lawyers will tell you,

但还有一个选择，法官和律师都不会告诉你，

often because they're not allowed to,

通常是因为他们不被允许说，

and also because it might be better if you don't know.

也因为你不知道可能更好。

This video will tell you that third choice,

本视频将告诉你那第三个选择，

but be warned, simply watching may prevent you from ever serving on a jury.

但请注意，仅仅观看本视频可能就会让你永远无法在陪审团任职。

So this is your last chance to hit the pause button

所以这是你按下暂停键的最后机会，

before you learn about jury nullification,

在你了解“陪审团否决权”之前，

when the defendant is 100% beyond a reasonable doubt guilty, 文化背景

也就是当被告毫无合理疑点地百分之百有罪时，

but the jurors also think he shouldn't be punished.

但陪审员们也认为他不该受到惩罚。

The jury can nullify the law and let him go free.

陪审团可以否决法律并让他重获自由。

But before you're on your next jury and yell null booyah at the judge,

但在你下次参加陪审团并向法官大喊“否决万岁”之前，

you should know that just talking about jury nullification in the wrong circumstances can get you arrested. 語法

你应该知道，仅仅在不适当的环境下讨论陪审团否决权就可能让你被捕。

Though a video such as this one simply acknowledging the existence of jury nullification

虽然像本视频这样只是承认陪审团否决权的存在，

and in no way advocating it is totally okay.

并且绝不提倡它的视频是完全可以的。

And while we're at it, CGP Grey isn't a lawyer, 習語

顺便提一句，CGP Grey 不是律师，

that's not legal advice, it's meant for entertainment purposes only.

这不是法律建议，仅供娱乐参考。

Seriously, guy, don't do anything in a court of law based on what an internet video told you,

说真的，伙计，千万别根据网络视频里说的话在法庭上采取行动，

no joke.

这可不是开玩笑。

So why can't you do this?

那么为什么你不能这样做呢？

It's because nullification isn't in the law,

这是因为否决权并没有写进法律，

but exists as a logical consequence of two other laws. 短語搭配

而是作为其他两条法律的逻辑结果存在的。

First, the juries can't be punished for a wrong decision,

首先，陪审团不能因为错误的决定而受到惩罚，

no matter what the witnesses, DNA evidence, or video proof show. 語法

无论证人、DNA证据或视频证据显示了什么。

That's the point of a jury, to be the final decider.

这就是陪审团的意义，成为最终的决策者。

And second, when a defendant is found not guilty,

其次，当一名被告被判无罪时，

that defendant can't be tried again for the same crime. 文化背景

该被告不能因同一罪行再次受审。

So there are only two stated options, guilty or not,

所以明面上的选项只有两个：有罪或无罪，

it's just that jury nullification is when the words of the jurors don't match their thoughts, 文化背景

只不过陪审团否决权是指陪审员的言辞与内心想法不一致时的情况，

for which they can't be punished

他们不会因此受到惩罚，

and their not guilty decision can't be changed.

并且他们的无罪决定也无法被更改。

These laws are necessary for juries to exist within a fair system,

这些法律是陪审团在公平系统中存在所必需的，

but the logical consequence is contentious.

但其逻辑后果却存在争议。

Lawyers and judges argue about jury nullification like physicists argue about quantum mechanics. 表達脈絡

律师和法官们对陪审团否决权的争论，就像物理学家们对量子力学的争论一样。

Both are difficult to observe

两者都难以观察，

and the interpretation of both has a huge philosophical ramification for the subject as a whole.

并且对两者的解释都会对其整个学科产生巨大的哲学影响。

Is jury nullification the righteous will of the people

陪审团否决权到底是人民的正义意志，

or an anarchy of 12

还是12个人的无政府状态，

or just how citizens judge their laws?

亦或是公民评判其法律的方式？

The go-to example in favor of nullification is the Fugitive Slave Law, 講解

支持否决权的首选例子是《逃奴法案》，

when Northern juries refused to convict escaped slaves and set them free.

当时北方的陪审团拒绝将被定罪的逃跑黑奴判刑并释放了他们。

Can't argue with that, 語氣意圖

这点无可反驳，

but the anarchy side is Southern juries refusing to convict lynch mobs,

但无政府状态的一面是南方陪审团拒绝给私刑暴民定罪，

not humanity at its best.

这可不是人类最好的一面。

But both of these are juries nullifying the law.

但这两个例子都是陪审团在否决法律。

And also, juries have two options for where their thoughts may differ from their words.

此外，陪审团的思想与言辞可能有两种不一致的情况。

Jury nullification usually refers to the non-guilty version,

陪审团否决权通常指的是“判决无罪”的版本，

but juries can convict without evidence just as easily as they can acquit in spite of it. 講解

但陪审团在没有证据的情况下定罪，同样与他们无视证据而宣告无罪一样容易。

This is jury nullification too,

这也是陪审团否决权，

and the jurors are protected by the first rule,

且陪审员受第一条规则的保护，

though the second doesn't apply

尽管第二条规则并不适用，

and judges do have the power to overrule a guilty verdict 講解

而且法官确实有权推翻有罪判决，

if they think the jurors aren't the best

如果他们认为陪审员的状态不佳，

and of course a guilty defendant can appeal at least for a little while,

当然，被判有罪的被告至少在一段时间内可以提出上诉，

which makes the guilty form of jury nullification weaker than the not guilty kind.

这使得有罪形式的陪审团否决权比无罪形式的要弱。

Cold comfort though. 習語

尽管这并不能带来多少安慰。

Given the possibility of jurors who might ignore the law as written, 講解

考虑到陪审员可能会无视成文法律，

it's not surprising when picking jurors for a trial,

那么在为审判挑选陪审员时也就不足为奇了，

lawyers whose existence is dependent on an orderly society,

那些依赖有序社会而存在的律师们，

will ask about nullification usually in the slightly roundabout way, 用詞

通常会以一种稍微迂回的方式询问关于否决权的问题，

do you have any beliefs that might prevent you from making a decision based strictly on the law? 講解

你是否有任何信仰，可能会阻止你严格根据法律做出决定？

If after learning about jury nullification,

如果在了解了陪审团否决权之后，

you think it's a good idea, answer yes and you'll be rejected,

你觉得这是个好主意，回答“是”，你就会被拒绝，

but answer no with the intent to get on the jury to nullify 短語搭配

但如果回答“否”，而意图是进入陪审团行使否决权，

and you've just committed perjury, 文化背景

你刚刚就犯了伪证罪，

technically a federal crime,

严格来说是一项联邦罪行，

which makes the optimal strategy once on a jury to zip it. 習語

这使得一旦成为陪审员，最佳策略就是闭嘴。

But this introduces a problem for jurors who intend to nullify.

但这也给那些打算行使否决权的陪审员带来了一个问题。

Telling the other 11 angry men about your position is risky,

把你的立场告诉其他11个怒汉是有风险的，

which makes nullification as a tool for fixing unjust laws nationwide problematic.

这使得在全国范围内将否决权作为修正不公正法律的工具变得有问题。

Not to mention about 95% of criminal charges in the United States never make it to trial 講解

更不用说美国大约95%的刑事指控根本不会进入审判阶段，

and rather end in a plea bargain, 文化背景

而是以认罪协商告终，

but that's a story for another time. 表達脈絡

但那是另一个故事了。

The only question about jury nullification that may matter in the end is if jurors should be told about it.

最终可能唯一重要的关于陪审团否决权的问题是，是否应该告诉陪审员这件事。

And the courts are near universal in their decision,

法院在他们的决定上几乎是一致的：

no way. 語氣意圖

绝对不行。

Which, again, might seem self-interested.

这同样可能看起来是出于私心。

Courts do depend on the law,

法院确实依赖于法律，

but there's evidence that telling jurors about nullification changes the way they vote

但有证据表明，告诉陪审员关于否决权的事情会改变他们投票的方式，

by making evidence less relevant to them, 語法

因为这让证据对他们来说变得不那么重要，

which isn't surprising, that's what nullification is.

这并不奇怪，毕竟这就是否决权的本质。

But mock trials also show sympathetic defendants get more non-guilty verdicts 用詞

但模拟审判也显示，能引起同情的被告会得到更多的无罪判决，

and unsympathetic defendants get more guilty verdicts

而引起反感的被告则会得到更多的有罪判决，

in front of jurors who were explicitly told about nullification compared to those who weren't, 語法

与未被明确告知否决权的陪审员相比，那些被明确告知的陪审员面前，

which sounds bad,

这听起来很糟糕，

but it's also easy to imagine situations where jurors blindly following the law would be terribly unjust. 語法

但也很容易想象这样一些情况：陪审员盲目遵守法律会造成极大的不公。

In the end, righteous will of the people or anarchy or citizen lawmaking,

最终，是人民的正义意志，还是无政府状态，或者是公民立法，

the system leaves you to decide. 短語搭配

这个系统让你自己来决定。

But as long as courts are fair, they require these rules. 語法

但只要法院是公平的，它们就需要这些规则。

So jury nullification will always be with us. 習語

因此，陪审团否决权将永远与我们同在。