[javert]

We have to assume not until/unless a lawyer shows up and says otherwise.

Rumors to the contrary, we do have a right to free speech, so you can say anything you want in a courtroom without being arrested, unless it causes immeidate danger (e.g. yelling "FIRE!").

When jury selection happens, I have heard that you can be rejected from being on the jury if you say (essentially) that you don't agree with the law. Not agreeing with the law is precisely what leads to jury nullification.

[nthj]

> so you can say anything you want in a courtroom without being arrested, unless it causes immeidate danger (e.g. yelling "FIRE!").

"F@$% you, your honor!”

“Bailiff, please arrest mr. nthj for contempt of court”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court

[javert]

Good point. And I'm sure if the court is in session, talking out of turn about anything (including jury nullification) would get you held in contempt of court.

So, saying you'll be arrested for talking about jury nullification in court doesn't really give an accurate picture. Though it is probably technically true.

[psykovsky]

Am I the only one to find court proceedings very medieval?

[javert]

What do you mean?

I think that they aren't medieval precisely because we have trial by jury, jury nullification, etc.

I would expect trials in non-common-law countries to feel much more medieval.

[psykovsky]

I was mostly thinking about the formality of it all. From every court around the world, not specifically american courts.

[cheald]

A judge can jail you for "contempt of court", which is basically whatever the judge decides is contempt.