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.