It is a case that dates back to Aug. 14, 1670, in London, England, when a squad of constables moved through a crowd gathered at the corner of Gracechurch and Lombard Streets and arrested two men. The indictment charged that the younger of the pair, 26-year-old William Penn, had taken "upon himself to preach and speak . . . by reason whereof a great concourse and tumult of people in the street . . . a long time did remain and continue, in contempt of the . . . Lord the King, and to his law; to the great disturbance of his peace."
William Mead, 42, was accused of aiding and abetting Penn. The real motive for the charges was the government's dislike for religious nonconformists. Both Penn and Mead were members of the pacifist Society of Friends, or Quakers, so-called because of their admonition that all should quake before the work of God.There was a trial, and after an hour-and-a-half of deliberation, eight of the 12 jurors had reached a verdict, so they came downstairs while the four dissenters remained upstairs. The court recorder harassed one of the four, and then the whole jury was ordered to reassemble. After a long time, they came down again and said the defendants were guilty of speaking in Gracechurch Street, but they would not say they were guilty of unlawful assembly.
The verdict drove the court officers up the wall. It was not the verdict they wanted. So they forced the jurors to retire again, pledging they would not be released until a proper verdict was rendered. This time, the jury said Penn was guilty of speaking, but not Mead, and they still made no mention of unlawful assembly.
The court told them to deliberate some more, and that they would not be allowed meat, drink, fire or tobacco until they had a verdict to please the court. Once again, their verdict was the same, causing the mayor to threaten to "cut the nose" of one member of the jury, Edward Bushell. The next day, the jury returned with a verdict of "not guilty," and all 12 jurors signed it.
At this point, the court fined each member of the jury 40 marks and ordered them imprisoned in Newgate Prison until they paid up. Even though he was officially judged "not guilty," Penn was charged with contempt of court and sent to the same prison. Eight jurors agreed to pay, and four refused. Bushell, one of the four, filed a lawsuit he eventually won. His case became a landmark to abolish the practice of punishing the jury for bringing in what the court thought was a wrongful verdict.
Modern lawyers often use this case as precedent for the belief that jurors should never have to divulge the reasons for their verdict, that they may disregard the evidence if they so choose, and that acquittal is final, subject to no appeal by the unsuccessful prosecutor.
Bushell's case continues to stand for a jury's undeniable right to return whatever verdict it pleases. It suggests why juries are generally so highly regarded today by American society - and also why they are such frustrating instruments of justice.