I saw an interesting comment regarding Julian Heicklen. What if someone handed out pamphlets that echoed State propaganda? Would that person have been arrested/kidnapped and charged with a crime?
Here's a sample "Fully Uninformed Juror's Association Pamphlet".
The police never lie.That would be amusing. Someone should make "Fully Uninformed Juror's Association" pamphlets, hand them out, and see what happens. You'd probably get arrested. I'm not trying it.
You should follow the judge's instructions, without thinking for yourself.
The defendant was indicted. That proves his guilt.
There's nothing wrong with any laws.
All laws should be strictly enforced as written.
Don't worry about sentencing. Don't worry that someone might have a long jail sentence for a minor offense.
You should obey orders without questioning them.
Don't let your emotions prevent you from voting "guilty".
Julian Heicklen is getting a bench trial, and not a jury trial. That eliminates almost all the benefits of a pro se defense. He might as well use a lawyer.
Someone pointed out that, if Julian Heicklen presents a weak defense, that could be bad. That would establish a precedent "You can't hand out FIJA pamphlets in front of a courthouse." A lawyer and an acquittal could establish the opposite precedent.
Technically, it isn't a binding precedent unless an appeals court or the Supreme Court rules "You can't hand out 'jury nullification' pamphlets in front of a courthouse." At the district level, a ruling only applies to that specific trial. Julian Heicklen shouldn't appeal unless he's represented by a competent lawyer. Otherwise, he might establish the opposite of the precedent he wants to establish.
3 comments:
That's an interesting idea. Have a long section on how jury nullification is not valid and name the various court rulings that have found otherwise, and then say those rulings are all wrong without citing a source for why that might be so.
This is outrageous ( I am referring to Julian's material).
I think that when handing out papers near federal property (is there even should be such thing as a federal property?), there needs to be a guy who films, and he must be wired for audio. His audio and video stream must be transmitted live, because the thugs will do all the dirty tricks and erase/lose evidence against them.
This is not enough, though. There must be someone filming the group on the street from remote location, using directed microphone, and also streaming it live, so that none of the equipment used becomes a key containing the evidence.
There must be a support group organized prior to event. This must include a lawyer and witnesses, means for bail, and other arrangements designed to negate the attempts of the thugs to scare / subdue / deny rights / throw book at / etc.
For instance, when he went to surrender his gun permit, the tugs did not give him a receipt. It must be anticipated that the thugs will try to use every simple method available to them to deny the people their rights within the justice system. So, things like that could be anticipated and used against them.
I wonder if it is possible to have someone on the inside watching the detained, and being ready to intervene or announce if something illegal is being done to the arrested.
Are you referring to when George Donnelly had to surrender his gun permit, after getting falsely charged with a crime for filming a FIJA event?
I don't think Julian Heicklen had a gun permit.
Post a Comment