jump to navigation

To more and more judges, the proper role of a jury is to convict those whom the state has accused December 4, 2015

Posted by Tantumblogo in disaster, disconcerting, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, scandals, silliness, Society.
trackback

A little bit different subject matter for this blog, but one I found pretty interesting.  A judge threw a man in jail – on non-refundable $150,000 bond, meaning he had to come up with $15,000 he’ll never see again whether convicted or not! – for advocating for juries to not be overawed by prosecutors and keep their wits about them when hearing cases.  This was called advocating “jury nullification,” and he apparently really torqued off a Michigan judge:

Mecosta County District Court Judge Peter Jaklevic is a former career prosecutor, like all righteous judges, and knows the purpose of jurors: to convict like they’re told.

So when Keith Wood — a wild-eyed former pastor and current lawless anarchist — began distributing seditious incitement to destroy the judicial system, Judge Peter Jaklevic knew just what to do: arrest him.

A 39-year-old former pastor was arrested and jailed in Mecosta County after he handed out fliers informing people about jury nullification in front of the county courthouse.

Keith Wood said he was handing out pamphlets from the Fully Informed Jury Association on Nov. 24 while standing on the sidewalks along Elm Street.

The Fully Informed Jury Association, and idea-terrorists of its ilk, promote the dangerous notion that Americans selected for jurors have a right — even an obligation— not just to follow the orders of judges, but to exercise their conscience and judgment in evaluating the state’s exercise of power over individuals. Such incendiary nonsense threatens the very premise of our justice system, which is that jurors will act as obedient foot soldiers in the government’s glorious and righteous efforts like the Great War on Drugs.[A war I, as a former advocate, have very mixed feelings over. While I know periodic lack of availability of drug of choice can be a powerful motivating factor in getting clean, I also view this war as one of the prime vehicles for the destruction of civil liberties in this country]

So Woods had to be stopped. But let nobody say that Judge Peter Jaklevic lacks proportion and mercy. He repeatedly sent intermediaries to Woods to bring him unto Jaklevic’s presence.

A little while later, a court deputy came outside and told Wood that the judge wanted to talk to him, and if he refused to do so, the Big Rapids police would come and arrest him.

Woods refused Jaklevic’s summons three times, just as Peter denied Christ three times. The hubris!

So Jaklevic ordered Woods arrested. Woods spent 12 hours in jail until he met the $150,000 bond — which he did by putting $15,000 on a credit card to pay a bail bondsman. Even if he’s acquitted or the charges are dismissed he won’t get that money back. Freedom is expensive.

Now, just as Woods denied Judge Jaklevic three times, Pharisee lawyers might deny Judge Jaklevic’s right to rule. They might say that courts have only upheld restrictions on distribution of jury nullification information inside courthouses or in other fora where the government has a right to restrict speech. See, e.g., Braun v. Baldwin, 346 F.3d 761, 763 (7th Cir. 2003). They might insist that multiple courts have struck down purported limits on distribution of jury nullification information in public places like streets, and have narrowed restrictions on “jury tampering” to situations where defendants targeted people they knew to be on particular juries. See, e.g., United States v. Heicklen, 858 F. Supp. 2d 256, 275 (S.D.N.Y. 2012); Verlo v. City & Cty. of Denver, Colorado, No. 15-CV-1775-WJM-MJW, 2015 WL 5012919 (D. Colo. Aug. 25, 2015)……

………But this legalism obstructs justice.  We all know what justice is: it’s when jurors convict the person the government has accused of a crime. That’s the proper function of a jury in America. Everything else is dross. Woods threatened to disrupt that function. How could Jaklevic let that pass?

Something to keep in mind if you ever wind up in front of a judge in this country.  And sure, it’s a bit of hyperbole, but not much, when prosecutors get convictions in 95% of federal criminal cases in this country.  It is a nearly metaphysical certitude that  you and I are guilty of having committed several federal felonies, even if we are totally ignorant of doing so.  That is the ludicrous depth and breadth of federal legislation and onerous penalties for trivial, innocent acts.

State courts average 80% convict rates.  Enjoy your Land of the Free.

Comments

1. camper - December 5, 2015

Re: War on drugs. While Singapore is not perfect, it does many things very wisely. They tried legalizing drugs. Their verdict? “Don’t legalize drugs. We tried that once and we lost a generation.”

2. Margaret Costello - December 5, 2015

Hmmm…I’ve actually experiences the opposite. I have been on two juries, once as an alternate in a 2nd degree murder trial. If anything the defense was able to kick out evidence that created an entirely different picture than what actually happened. We didn’t find out until after the hung jury that the defendant was utterly guilty. Although it wouldn’t surprise me that the justice/legal system has become corrupt. Why not? Everything else in our country has been corrupted. It will be that corrupt system that will be the means of our persecution in the future. God bless~

Tantumblogo - December 7, 2015

My dad was on a murder trial way back in the way back. He felt the same way. He was stunned there were a few jurors who wanted to aquit when the evidence was just overwhelming.

I think things have gone severely down hill even in the last few years. 20 years ago conviction rates on federal crimes were on the order of 60%, but since then they’ve started throwing everything they can possibly find to get people to plea bargain. YMMV.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: