Jury nullification is the term for when a jury declines to convict a defendant despite overwhelming evidence of guilt. This can be a form of civil disobedience, a political statement against a specific law, or a show of empathy and support to the defendant.
“It’s not a legal defense sanctioned under the law,” said Cheryl Bader, associate professor of law at Fordham School of Law. “It’s a reaction by the jury to a legal result that they feel would be so unjust or morally wrong that they refuse to impose it, despite what the law says.”
Jury refers to the twelve. If any one could nullify them it would say juror.
I assume you read the last word of that sentence? If there’s a hung jury then prosecutors can just bring it to trial again, as there was no jeopardy with the first case, as the jury never reached a unanimous decision.
So jury nullification is equal to a not guilty verdict. It’s just that the jury has deemed that while technically guilty they shouldn’t be punished for what they did. With jury nullification the defendant can’t be tried again, compared to a mistrial where they can.
If all vote not guilty it’s called an acquittal. If that happens, despite overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is jury nullification ending in an acquittal. If a mistrial happens, meaning the jury cannot reach a verdict, despite overwhelming evidence of guilt, it is jury nullification ending in a mistrial.
Source: I have been a public defender in NYC for 15 years.