Now there's an interesting thought. :)

Though, realistically, given the fraction of the population that would see this and to what extent anyone here could track how each of us decides and our reasons for doing so when we're jury members, probably not. However, reducing from the sorta acausal abstractions of TDT to simple iterated games may at least help to think about it, may help provide some useful intuition pumps at least.

So, given that we're now in an iterated game with respect to nullification style issues... What's the right answer? (Actually, legal system stuff is complicated, so even figuring out how to partition the players, not to mention the payoff matrix, is going to be tricky.)