Paging Bootlickers. Bootlickers to the brown courtesy phone...
Posted on 06/24/2004 12:17:06 PM PDT by AdamSelene235
BRIGHTON - The jury deliberating the case against Rick E. Stanley asked the judge a rare question Wednesday that didn't sit well with the gun rights activist.
"Does Mr. Stanley have the names and addresses of the jury?" was the question posed to retired Supreme Court Justice Joseph R. Quinn, who is presiding at the trial.
With that, Stanley bowed his head in apparent disappointment.
Adams County prosecutors and Stanley's defense lawyers agreed to let the judge tell the jurors that Stanley will have access only to their names, not their addresses.
Defense lawyer R. Scott Reisch said the question was the first time he had ever heard such an inquiry from jurors.
The jury deliberated for about five hours Wednesday without reaching a verdict. Quinn dismissed the jurors for the day after they submitted another question which asked for the definition of culpable.
The jury will resume deliberations this morning.
Stanley, 49, is on trial on two felony counts of attempting to influence a public servant. He is accused of sending Thornton Municipal Judge Charles J. Rose and 17th Judicial District Judge Donald W. Marshall Jr. a "notice of order" demanding that they reverse his conviction on a weapons violation or face arrest by the Mutual Defense Pact Militia and a trial for treason.
Rose convicted and sentenced Stanley to 90 days in jail for carrying a firearm on public property. Marshall upheld the conviction when Stanley appealed.
Reisch argued during the trial that the "notice of order" was not a threat and became alarming to the judges only after authorities provided them with armed security.
Yeah, I can see where the jury might be worried about such a thing. Almost as much as gun owners are worried about antigun fanatics and the federal government knowing theirs.
Interesting question from the jury.
Wonder what they are thinking.
The case came about because, after a different judge found Stanley guilty of a gun crime, he wrote the judge a letter saying that his "militia" was going to "arrest" the judge for violating the Constitution. I guess the jury would like to convict Stanley without getting any such threats themselves.
"Wonder what they are thinking."
I would think they are worried about this guy might come looking for them.
Paging Bootlickers. Bootlickers to the brown courtesy phone...
Well they are not to bright if they don't know the word culpable.
I would think they are worried about this guy might come looking for them.
That if they convict him they are going to get a letter threatening their arrest by some fringe militia? Just a guess.
You should really read some of this guy's writings. He's not your average responsible gun owner; he's a nutcase who's armed to the teeth and looking to pick a fight that ends with suice-by-cop. If I were on that jury, I wouldn't want him to know anything about me at all.
He should have grinned instead and chirped "nothing a P.I. can't cure, heh" just to agitate them even more.
Anti-gun wankers. All of them.
And he'd be cooling his heels in jail for contempt of court for a nice spell, too.
That question alone is grounds for a mistrial.
Stanley has been arrested and had his home raided on multiple occasions without any violence.
"That question alone is grounds for a mistrial."
That it does.
Indeed. And in today's world, if you know somebody's name, and general area of residence like state or metro area (not even that's needed, if it's an unusual name), and have access to the Internet, you'll most likely have their address in 5 minutes, especially if they own their home.
Sanity isn't to be judged by a jury except when used as a defense.
Not to mention every citizen who has ever written or phoned their rep.
C'mon. Give 'em a break. He sent a letter threatening arrest and a trial for treason. Hmmm. Wonder what the penalty for a treason conviction is...
In this day and age, isn't it really prudence that they were exercising?
Or do you freely provide your name and address to strangers who behave oddly?
What'd you say your name and address was?
Too easy and too pat to call them anti-gun wankers.
{ducking}
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.