“If I am going to err, let it be on the side of my fellow man”

Graham Dugas has a great piece on jury nullification at LRC, in which he addresses one’s obligation to “tell the truth” as it pertains to surviving voir dire, and whether “lying” is the “libertarian” thing to do:

Now as to “lying”… and honor… The knock comes on the door…. “Are there any Jews here” is the question. What is unstated is “Are there any Jews here that we can take and kill.” So you may freely reply in the same vein: “No there are no Jews here” and also leave unstated “that you can take and kill” even as they left it unstated.

…During jury examination, what the judge is asking you is this… “Will you be my puppet and apply the laws as I see them regardless of the plain meaning of the Constitution (or higher Natural Law)?” “Will you become my vassal?” What he is saying is: “Will you join me in applying the law?” and he leaves unstated “Will you join me in applying the law unjustly?” You can, with a free conscience reply, “Yes I will join you in applying the law” and leave out the adverb “unjustly” even as he left it out.

…I have often wondered how someone’s conscience could be bothered if they told a policeman or a judge a “half-truth” but they are not bothered by voting to convict their fellow man of some evil law and subjecting him to draconian punishment for it. If I am going to err, let it be on the side of my fellow man.

Go read it. All of it. I’ve got no further comment at this time.