Who else thinks the institution of courts and trials should be reformed? When you break laws and are forced to plead in court you can plead one of 3 things, guilty, not guilty, or no contest. These pleads are based on whether you broke the law or not, not if your infraction of the law was justified on moral or ethical grounds. It is quite crude and subhuman if you ask me. A judge or a jury should be able to nullify the charge if the defense gives a compelling argument that breaking the law was some how justified. For example, historical precedent. If someone broke a law and did something that wasn't a even against the law, say 200 year ago and the law is stupid and unnecessary and only a means to control the populace, then the judge or jury should be able to motion for the case to be dropped and the defendant not to be charged or convicted of any crimes.

>>509495512 (OP)
>These pleads