[Andy Leipold (guest-blogging), June 30, 2006 at 10:14am] Trackbacks
Judge vs. Jury Acquittals; Thanks

Thanks to everyone who slogged through the last four days of posts about judicial acquittals. The comments were extremely helpful to my ongoing thinking about the topic; I appreciate that so many took time to offer their insights. Thanks also to Eugene for inviting me. Hope to do it again sometime. Best, Andy

Steve Lubet (mail):
The article is great and the posts were informative. Thanks to Andy and Eugene for raising the issue.
6.30.2006 2:20pm
The Original TS (mail):
Dear Andy,

Thanks for posting it. I thought it was quite an interesting topic.

BTW, the phenomenon re the sentencing guidelines influencing judges to acquit is not new. Much of the growth of the criminal common law can be traced back to judges uncomfortable about hanging someone for a relatively trivial offense. The definition of burglary, for example, arose out of a slow accretion of details introduced by judges reluctant to convict.
6.30.2006 2:20pm
nick (mail):
It was our pleasure!
6.30.2006 2:32pm
stealthlawprof (mail) (www):
The article was very, very interesting indeed. I do not work in the criminal law/procedure arena but have always said if I were guilty, I would want a jury trial and if I were innocent, I would want a bench trial. Maybe I need to get more detailed now about how guilty, of what, and what the sentencing guidelines would say about it.

Then again, perhaps the best course is to stay out of trouble ....
6.30.2006 2:55pm