For centuries, the greatest protection against unjust convictions and punishments was the institution of jury independence, including so-called “jury nullification.” The prosecutions of John Moore and Tanner Mansell illustrate a scenario in which jurors—apprised of their historic injustice-preventing powers—would have rendered a not guilty verdict. But because John and Tanner’s jurors, who appeared desperate for a way to acquit, weren’t informed of their historic prerogative to acquit against the evidence to prevent injustice, they had no option but to convict.

When the Cato Institute’s Project on Criminal Justice learned of John’s and Tanner’s plights, we took their case to the highest levels of government—ultimately resulting in presidential pardons for each of them. Please join us as we hear first-hand accounts, discuss what went wrong, explore how Cato got involved, and consider solutions to the pathology of unjust prosecutions and convictions.