Posted on 07/09/2021 1:01:15 AM PDT by wannabegeek
COLUMBUS, Ohio (WSYX) — A Franklin County judge admits to WSYX that he’s mandating COVID-19 vaccinations as conditions of probation in his courtroom. Now, some offenders affected are speaking out to say it’s not right.
“The whole atmosphere of the courtroom changed,” said criminal offender Sylvaun Latham who was sentenced for a gun and drug charge last week before Common Pleas Court Judge Richard Frye. “Everyone had this look on their face. I broke character and asked (my attorney), ‘Can he do this?’”
Out of 20 sentencings Judge Frye conducted last week, three included requirements to get the vaccination within 30 days and provide proof to the probation department.
Judge Frye told WSYX that none of the offenders had a religious or medical objection to the unprecedented court-ordered terms.
“I know Judge Frye’s reputation,” said Latham. “I know he’s known for giving the max time. I don’t want to go to jail. I also don’t want to have five years probation.”
Latham told WSYX that his attorney struck a deal with prosecutors which was three years probation.
However, when he stood before the judge at sentencing, terms had changed. He said Judge Frye told him he could choose between five years probation or just one year on the condition that he receives the COVID-19 vaccine.
(Excerpt) Read more at abc6onyourside.com ...
you forgot the /s you cant really believe picking up trash is same as getting injected with an experimental “vaccine”?
Justice would be served if the defendant demand a resignation and forfeiture of license to practice law is presented by the judge. This document would become effective if the defendant suffers any complications from the vaccine, during the period of his probation. Remind the judge that the experimental vaccine providers are protected from legal actions due to vaccines’ damage to humans, and he and his family will feel the full economic devastation from his ‘ruling’.
-PJ
There was no force. It was a choice. And probation is a breeze. Just behave and show up. If he had no choice but the vax sentence, then there could be a problem.
It wasn’t mandatory. It was an option. Frankly my gripe is when defense and prosecution has an agreement on sentencing, the judge should be in on it and part of it before the defendant agrees to it. But this guy was given a choice. And the more harsh really wasn’t all that bad.
One cannot just wave away an unconstitutional option as being given an option.
-PJ
I’m sorry to keep asking but you seem to be evading the legal question.
Can a judge give someone the CHOICE between:
* 5 years probation
* 1 year probation and 400 hours working for Biden’s campaign
Can a judge give someone the CHOICE between:
* 20 years PRISON
* 1 month probation and 4000 hours working for Biden’s campaign
The point is that both the Biden campaign work and the vaxx are illicit choices to give him - not accepted sentences, because they’re not related to public safety (keeping a danger off the streets), rehabilitation, or restitution.
there is no nexus or connection between the two it is bad law the law is an ass
Again, it is a matter of choice. A standard sentence or a moderate one that has something unpleasant, maybe even repugnant, about it. There is nothing illegal about repugnant.
There is nothing unconstitutional if given as a choice. We have no trouble with taking the vote from felons even though the vote is a constitutional matter. He has the choice of a full throttle probation period, within the sentencing guidelines, or a lesser probation if he gets an arm stick. If he disagrees with the vax he can take the longer probation. Frankly probation is no big deal. A pain, but no big deal.
-PJ
People waive rights all the time. Anyone who testified in a criminal case waives a right. Anyone who waives Miranda waives a right.
There are rights, and there are protections.
You have a protection against self-incrimination, but you can choose to testify. You cannot have a judge compel you to testify against your protections.
The 8th amendment is a protection against cruel and unusual punishment imposed by the government. Being forced to take a permanent experimental drug or face a harsher sentence is cruel and unusual. A judge cannot compel you to accept a harsher punishment because the alternative punishment is an unconstitutional violation of your protections.
-PJ
The judge didn’t compel him to take the stick. He sentenced him to 5 years probation. That’s the sentence. The defendant has the option, not a mandate, to get a reduced sentence if he gets the jab. And that’s why it’s not a constitutional issue. He’s not mandated to accept the alternative sentence. It’s simply an option.
OHIO PING!
Please let me know if you want on or off the Ohio Ping list.
Franklin County (OH) judge orders COVID-19 vaccines as term of probation [but defendant don’t want COVID injection, called ACLU! +_)(*&^%$#@]
ABC 6 In Your Side WSYX ^ | June 28, 2021 | Lisa Rantala
Posted on 7/9/2021, 4:01:15 AM by wannabegeek
I can’t explain it, but I know when something is just not right.
I see it more like 5 years probation or ECT that you don’t really need and is unrelated to your crime.
Uh...maybe that’s it. The second option is unrelated to the crime. The judge has options in the sentencing by statute and getting an experimental vaccine isn’t one of them.
Could it be the judge was going for his version of the greater good? I’d have a problem if that was the time that not sentence. But it wasn’t.
Meant to say it d have a problem if the shot was the only sentence.
Show in the statutes where the Judge has the authority to order or coerce this type of medical treatment. He doesn’t. This is outside the sentencing guidelines.
Show me where it’s outside the sentencing guidelines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.