One of the last (and very best) true investigative journalists is William Norman Grigg. I have admired his work for years. A report he recently wrote was covered by one of the very best
(if not THE BEST) newspapers in the country, The Eau Claire (Wisconsin) Journal. Grigg writes, “When New Hampshire Governor John Lynch signed HB 146 into law on June 18, the Granite Statebecame the first in the nation to enact a measure
explicitly recognizing and protecting the indispensable right of jury nullification.
(“Jury Nullification Is NOW The Law”) New Hampshire Strikes a Blow Against the Sovietized Amerikan ‘Justice’ System by William Norman Grigg
When New Hampshire Governor John Lynch signed HB 146 into law on June 18, the Granite State became the first in the nation to enact a measure explicitly recognizing and protecting the indispensable right of jury nullification.
New Hampshire’s jury nullification law reads, in relevant part: “In all criminal proceedings the court shall permit the defense to inform the jury of its right to judge the facts and the application of the law in relation to the facts in controversy.”
Posted on 06/18/2012 1:56:01 PM PDT by navysealdad
A jury found baseball star Roger Clemens not guilty on six charges that he lied to Congress in 2008 about his use of performance enhancing drugs. Clemens was charged with lying to Congress about his use of performance enhancing drugs.
Accused murderer of Trayvon Martin George Zimmerman almost certainly will eventually face a jury. And what if that jury is all white? A recent Duke University study showed that all white juries in Florida were more likely to convict a black defendant than mixed ethnic juries. Though Zimmerman isn’t black, the defense almost certainly will pull out all stops to make the case that Zimmerman was the real victim and that Martin was the aggressor. In essence this means that jurors will be asked to do a defendant and victim role reversal and put Martin on trial.
by Doug Book, staff writer
For years, retired Penn State chemistry professor Julian Heicklen has handed out literature to passersby in front of the Manhattan courthouse, informing them of the rights of jurors. As stated by the Fully Informed Jury Association, “the primary function of the independent juror is not, as many think, to dispense punishment to fellow citizens accused of breaking various laws, but rather to protect fellow citizens from tyrannical abuses of power by government.”
tomwoods.com ^ | Thomas E Woods
Posted on Tuesday, November 29, 2011 12:41:04 PM by don-o
Retired chemistry professor Julian Heicklen is facing imprisonment for advocating jury nullification to passersby, following an indictment by federal prosecutors last year, according to the New York Times. He stood on a plaza outside the United States Courthouse in Manhattan and handed out brochures on the subject.
According to prosecutors, Heicklen’s “advocacy of jury nullification, directed as it is to jurors, would be both criminal and without Constitutional protections no matter where it occurred….
Monroe County Chief Court Clerk Admits Grand Jury Foreman of 27 Years Illegitimate| The Post & Email
LETTER FROM COURT CLERK IS “THE SMOKING GUN”
by Sharon Rondeau
For how many decades has an unappointed and unaccountable person been posing as foreman of the grand jury and issuing indictments?
(Sep. 20, 2011) — A chief clerk in Monroe County, TN has admitted, and The Post & Email can now confirm, that there has been no duly-appointed grand jury foreman in Monroe County, TN for at least the last 27 years. The foreman is responsible for signing indictments indicating that there is “probable cause” to go forward with a prosecution.
Monroe County Chief Court Clerk Martha M. Cook has stated in a letter to Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III dated September 16, 2011 that no appointing orders exist for the grand jury foreman dating back to at least 1985. Although Gary Pettway had been acting as foreman for at least 20 consecutive years between 1990 and 2010, Cook has stated that the court has no official appointing order or evidence that he was ever sworn in as required by the Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Tennessee constitution.
Rule 6(g) of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure states that the judge of the criminal court appoints the foreman of the grand jury. It also states that “The foreperson shall possess all the qualifications of a juror,” which are outlined in TCA 22-2-314. All grand jurors must be sworn in before serving…………………..
After her Casey Anthony coverage, Nancy Grace and her penchant to prematurely convict worries the defense attorney of Conrad Murray, on trial in the death of Michael Jackson. Nancy Grace is a former Georgia prosecutor who became a television legal commentator, first on Court TV and, more recently, on Turner Broadcasting‘s HLN cable channel. (CNN)
Tim Rutten July 23, 2011
The sensational result in the O.J. Simpson murder case notwithstanding, it’s an article of faith among criminal defense attorneys that sequestered jurors are more prone to convict than those who go home when the trial recesses for the day.
That’s why more notice should have been paid this week when J. Michael Flanagan, who is defending Conrad Murray — the physician charged with causing the death of pop superstar Michael Jackson — asked Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor to sequester the jurors when the trial gets underway in September. Pastor said he didn’t think isolation was necessary and that, given its current funding, the court couldn’t afford to house and supervise a jury for the many weeks the trial probably will take.
What was equally remarkable about Flanagan’s request was that he never argued that his client’s right to a fair trial was threatened by a media frenzy. Rather, he argued, Murray’s 6th Amendment rights were jeopardized by the attention of a single news media personality: Nancy Grace.
Grace is the former Georgia prosecutor who became a television legal commentator, first on Court TV and, more recently, on Turner Broadcasting’s HLN cable channel. She’s a snarling, angry presence whose habitual sneer is an epic chasm of contempt. Her view of the criminal justice system is flawlessly Manichean.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com …
In Casey Anthony’s case we see an example of a grave injustice in the modern system. I’m not talking about her acquittal. When the prosecutor fails to prove someone’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the only responsible thing for the jury to do is refuse to damn the suspect to time in a cage. An innocent person imprisoned is so much worse than a guilty person let go, as in the former instance the state seduces all of society to cheer on and legitimize an injustice. Also, whereas justice for the guilty is at least a metaphysical possibility outside of prison, it is downright precluded institutionally for the innocent on the inside.
The actual travesty here is the offense of which Casey Anthony has been convicted: four counts of providing false information to a law enforcement officer. This should not be an offense in a free society, and I am struck by how little this horror has gained attention in the last week.
Lying in most circumstances is immoral. And lying to cover up one’s crimes might be especially egregious, and arguably criminal in itself. But Casey Anthony was acquitted of the actual crime of murder. As far as the state is concerned, she has not been proven guilty. So why is her dishonesty with the police an offense against the law?
Many can’t even relate to this point as they like the idea of this person suffering at least somewhat for a crime they assume she committed but got away with. Taking it to different contexts, we can see the full injustice involved in criminalizing lying to the police. What if people are lying to protect themselves from persecution? Indeed, when we engage in the thought experiment of what would be a morally acceptable lie, we can’t help but think of such examples as lying to Nazis about Jews hiding somewhere, or lying to cover for a runaway slave. If lying is ever defensible, it doubtless is when the only deceived and harmed persons are agents of oppression, and it is done purely in service of preserving someone’s rightful freedom.
The woman, known only as juror number 12 left her job and went into hiding fearing co-workers would ‘want her head on a platter’.
Her husband said before leaving she told him: ‘I’d rather go to jail than sit on a jury like this again.’
He told NBC News he was worried for her health and had his bags packed ready to leave if his 60-year-old wife’s name gets released.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk …
For Time Served and “Good Behavior“….Ughh! All she has to do is pay some big fines…
Nancy Grace is livid. She had been shilling for months for a conviction of Casey Anthony for allegedly murdering her two-year-old daughter, Caylee, and now the jury has acquitted Anthony of murder charges. What’s a gal like Nasty Nancy to do?
Perhaps the first thing that Nasty Nancy should do is to read the laws of this country, and learn the standards that supposedly exist for conviction. Even though Nasty Nancy’s standards for conviction are simple – an accusation automatically means one is guilty – the legal standard actually is “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.”
(One must remember that Nasty Nancy during the Duke Lacrosse Case, in which she automatically declared the lacrosse players guilty of gang rape, actually tried to claim that the legal presumption of innocence was a creation of Hitler’s Germany. I’m serious.)
During the trial of Casey Anthony, the prosecution managed to establish what people already knew:
* The skeletal remains found were those of Caylee and there was duct tape sticking to her skull;
* Casey lied to the police about a number of things;
* Casey denied murdering her daughter;
* Casey was not a person of the highest character.
But Russell Huekler, one of five alternate jurors who were present for all the testimony and were sequestered with the 12 other jurors, said he would have given the same verdict and is stunned by the public anger.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk …
‘Team Casey’ gives America the finger: How defence celebrated: “Casey Anthony‘s defence team have been branded insensitive and loutish after they were spotted celebrating their court victory with a lavish champagne party.
In an unapologetic display many have slammed as inappropriate considering the serious nature of their case, Jose Baez and his team were seen downing drinks as they watched reaction to their client being found not guilty of brutally murdering her two-year-old child, Caylee.
At one point, attorney Cheney Mason could be seen making an obscene gesture to an angry crowd outside, an apparent gesture of contempt towards anyone who dares criticise the team.”
CNN is reporting that Casey Anthony was served papers in jail Tuesday night for her deposition on a defamation lawsuit filed by Zenaida Gonzalez. Attorney John Morgan from Morgan & Morgan in Orlando is representing Gonzalez in the case.
Browse · Search
|Pings · Mail||News/Activism
Topics · Post Article
Posted on Monday, January 17, 2011 8:11:04 AM by KeyLargo
Juror’s research led to murder mistrial By Bob Kalinowski (Staff Writer) Published: January 17, 2011
Legal experts have coined them “Google mistrials.”
Sometimes it’s done unwittingly. Other times it’s done against a judge’s specific directions.
On Friday, it ended Lamont Cherry’s murder trial in Luzerne County court. A juror admitted to researching medical issues at home on her computer after five hours of deliberations Thursday ended in a deadlocked panel, prompting a cloud of confusion and eventually a mistrial in the case.
Cherry was acquitted of first-degree murder, while a mistrial was declared on two other counts of homicide, in the death of 12-month-old Zalayia McCloe in May 2009.
In today’s technology-driven world and rise of Internet-capable smart phones, courts are increasingly declaring mistrials and overturning convictions after learning jurors used the Internet to research cases or commented about proceedings on social media sites, media law experts say.
The so-called “Google mistrials” have prompted courts across the country to adopt more specific rules for jurors’ use of technology as it relates to the cases in which they serve.
“Traditionally, courts have told jurors not to read the newspaper, don’t watch TV, or listen to radio coverage of the case. I take the position, in this day of age, that’s not enough,” said Eric Robinson, a Reno, Nev., attorney who is deputy director of the Reynolds Center for Courts and Media at the University of Nevada, Reno.
The Post & Email has posted a new item, ”
Report: Abused Children remain at risk due to Monroe County Corruption
EYEWITNESS: JUDGE GAVE “PREDETERMINED ANSWER”
by Sharon Rondeau
Tennessee Congressional candidate Mr. H. James Headings was an eyewitness in the courtroom in Madisonville, TN, the seat of Monroe County, TN, for a hearing on Tuesday morning regarding the arrest of Walter Fitzpatrick on April 1, 2010.After asking the Monroe County grand jury to act on a criminal complaint of treason against Barack Hussein Obama, Fitzpatrick attempted to execute a citizen’s arrest of Gary Pettway, the Monroe County grand jury foreman, for his alleged illegal occupation of that position for the past 20 years.
On April 1, Fitzpatrick was charged with “intimidation” and “riot,” among other things.Darren Huff was arrested on April 20 and was “charged in U.S. District Court in Knoxville with traveling across interstate lines armed and ready to incite violence if necessary to take over the city of Madisonville and the Monroe County Courthouse located there.”
Law enforcement claimed that Huff’s display of “suspicious indicators” on his vehicle caught their attention.
DIRECT GOVERNMENT PUNISHMENT ABSENT JURY APPROVAL IS “ATTAINDER”
by Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III,
Have Articles of War replaced the U.S. Constitution?Sept. 5, 2010 — Saint Crispin’s Day 2006“Today, you are the law!”So begins Frank Galvin’s summation to the jury in the movie The Verdict. Galvin’s narration laconically illustrates to citizens in the jury box that their participation, inspection, deliberation, and approval of government action defines the rule of law. More to the point Galvin’s succinct charter defines the rule and role of citizen juries.The scales of justice in criminal proceedings balance the interests of the state against the rights and interests of citizens. In peacetime jurors do the assaying.In time of WAR large letters, the rules change.
The first casualty of WAR is the jury. Truth’s survival is irrelevant.Juries are silent in time of WAR inter arma leges silent.
EXCERPT ~ CONTINUES @ LINK…