To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Frank O. Horton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Frank O. Horton
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Wyoming's At-large district
In office
January 3, 1939 – January 3, 1941
Preceded byPaul R. Greever
Succeeded byJohn J. McIntyre
Member of the Wyoming Senate
In office
1923–1931
Member of the Wyoming House of Representatives
In office
1921–1923
Personal details
Born(1882-10-18)October 18, 1882
Muscatine, Iowa, U.S.
DiedAugust 17, 1948(1948-08-17) (aged 65)
Sheridan, Wyoming, U.S.
Political partyRepublican

Frank Ogilvie Horton (October 18, 1882 – August 17, 1948) was a United States representative from Wyoming. Born in Muscatine, Iowa, he attended the public schools, graduated from Morgan Park Military Academy (in Illinois) in 1899 and from the University of Chicago in 1903. During the Spanish–American War he served as a private in Company C, Fiftieth Iowa Regiment in 1898; he moved to Saddlestring, Wyoming, in 1905 and engaged in livestock raising. He was a member of the Wyoming House of Representatives from 1921 to 1923, and served in the Wyoming State Senate from 1923 to 1931, being its president in 1931.

Horton was a delegate to the Republican National Conventions in 1928 and 1936, and was a Republican National committeeman from 1937 to 1948. He was elected as a Republican to the Seventy-sixth Congress, serving from January 3, 1939 to January 3, 1941. He was an unsuccessful candidate for reelection in 1940 to the Seventy-seventh Congress, and resumed his former pursuits in Saddlestring as the Owner and operator of the HF Bar Ranch. He died in Sheridan, Wyoming; interment was in Willowgrove Cemetery, Buffalo, Wyoming.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    15 100 189
    6 724
    149 847
  • The Law You Won't Be Told
  • How Much Money Do Independent Movies Make? - J. Horton
  • SÚPER AYUDA #240 Lo Que Funciona Siempre Para Eliminar La Migraña

Transcription

# The Law You Won't Be Told On a Jury you know your options: guilty, or not. But there's another choice that neither the judge nor the lawyers will tell you -- often because they're not allowed to and also it might better if you *don't* know. This video will tell you that third choice, but be warned: simply *watching* may prevent you from ever serving on a jury -- so this is your last chance to hit the pause button before you learn about... Jury nullification: when the defendant is 100% beyond-a-reasonable-doubt guilty *but* the jurors *also* think he shouldn't be punished. The jury can nullify the law and let him go free. But before your on your next jury and yell 'Null! Booya!' at the judge you should know that just talking about jury nullification in the wrong circumstances can get you arrested. Though a video such as this one, simply acknowledging the *existence* of jury nullification and in *no way advocating* it is totally OK. And, while we're at it: *(CGP Grey is not a lawyer, this is not legal advice it is meant for entertainment purposes only. Seriously, guy, don't do anything in a court of law based on what an Internet Video told you. No joke.)* So why can't you do this? It's because nullification isn't *in* the law †, but exists as a logical consequence of two other laws: First: that juries can't be punished for a 'wrong' decision -- no matter the witnesses, DNA, or video proof show. That's the point of a jury: to be the decider. and Second: when a defendant is found not-guilty, that defendant can't be tried again for the same crime ‡. So there *are* only two stated options: guilty or not, it's just that jury nullification is when the words of the jurors don't match their thoughts -- for which they can't be punished and their not-guilty decision can't be changed. These laws are necessary for juries to exist within a fair system, but the logical consequence is... contentious -- lawyers and judges argue about jury nullification like physicists argue about quantum mechanics. Both are difficult to observe and the interpretation of both has a huge philosophical ramification for the subject as a whole. Is nullification the righteous will of the people or an anarchy of twelve or just how citizens judge their laws? The go-to example in favor of nullification is the fugitive slave law: when Northern juries refused to convict escaped slaves and set them free. Can't argue with that. But the anarchy side is Southern juries refusing to convict white lynch mobs. Not humanity at its best. But both of these are juries nullifying the law. Also juries have *two* options where their thoughts may differ from their words. Jury nullification usually refers to the non-guilty version but juries can convict without evidence just as easily as they can acquit in spite of it. This is jury nullification too and the jurors are protected by the first rule, though the second doesn't apply and judges have the power to overrule a guilty verdict if they think the jurors are… nt the best. And, of course, a guilty defendant can appeal, at least for a little while. Which makes the guilty form of jury nullification weaker than the not-guilty kind. Cold comfort, though. Given the possibility of jurors who might ignore the law as written, it's not surprising when picking jurors for a trial, lawyers -- whose existence is dependent on an orderly society -- will ask about nullification, usually in the slightly roundabout way: "Do you have any beliefs that might prevent you from making a decision based strictly on the law?" If after learning about jury nullification you think it's a good idea: answer 'yes' and you'll be rejected, but answer 'no' with the intent to get on the jury to nullify and you've just committed perjury -- technically a federal crime -- which makes the optimal strategy once on a jury to zip it. But This introduces a problem for jurors who intend to nullify: telling the other 11 angry men about your position is risky, which makes nullification as a tool for fixing unjust laws nation wide problematic. (Not to mention about 95% of criminal charges in the United States never make it to trial and rather end in a plea bargain, but that's a story for another time.) The only question about jury nullification that may matter is if jurors should be *told* about it and the courts are near universal † in their decision: 'no way'. Which might seem self-interested -- again, courts depend on the law -- but there's evidence that telling jurors about nullification changes the way they vote by making evidence less relevant -- which isn't surprising: that's what nullification *is*. But mock trials also show sympathetic defendants get more non-guilty verdicts and unsympathetic defendants get more *guilty* verdicts in front of jurors who were explicitly told about nullification compared to those who weren't. Which sounds bad, but it also isn't difficult to imagine situations where jurors blindly following the law would be terribly unjust -- which is the heart of nullification: juries judge the law, not solely evidence. In the end righteous will of the people, or anarchy, or citizen lawmaking -- the system leaves you to decide -- but as long as courts are fair they require these rules, so jury nullification will always be with us.

References

  • United States Congress. "Frank O. Horton (id: H000798)". Biographical Directory of the United States Congress.
U.S. House of Representatives
Preceded by Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Wyoming's at-large congressional district

January 3, 1939 – January 3, 1941
Succeeded by


This page was last edited on 30 January 2024, at 19:56
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.