Denver Judge Axes the Constitution - Update of Rick Stanley's 2A/Civil Disobedience Trial

The Stanley for U.S. Senate 2002 Colorado Campaign - News Release ^ | May 15, 2002 | Stanley for U.S. Senate 2002 - Colorado

[exodus]

To: LibertyRocks
"You obviously have never been on a jury or in a jury pool.
I was in a pool of 24 for a DUI case last June.
THREE police officers in that pool..."

# 45 by sinkspur

******************

I don't need to be on a jury or in a jury pool
to know that police officers are a part of our government.

They are not my "peers," and they are not "impartial."

Officers of the government are not qualified to be members of a jury.

[exodus]

To: Squantos
"...if the judges instructions regarding the mention of the constitution are true..."

"...Asking jurors to interpret the Constitution is not what one is asked to do in a courtroom.
Jurors are asked to decide whether someone is guilty or not guilty of breaking THE LAW.
# 61 by sinkspur

******************

Jurors have the responsibility of interpreting the Constitution.
That's what jury nullification is all about.

Jurors are not required to blindly follow bad laws.

[exodus]

To: Zon
"...I don't want some hayseed from Penelope, Texas who can barely read
to decide on the Constitutionality of Laws.
That's the jurisdiction of courts.
# 68 by sinkspur

******************

The jury is an intrinsic part of our court system.

[Squantos]

Agree , I know this first hand, I have done so as a member of a Jury.........really pissed off the Goobermint little-gators and the Judge ! Point is it was something we as jurors had to discover ourselves as it was alledgedly illegal for any of the pre-trial instructions to suggest such nullification.....

BTW great colors but real confusing :o)

Stay Safe !

[exodus]

To: LibertyRocks
"...most people cannot afford to go on jury duty. Government employees continue to receive their salary while on the jury. So those working in the private sector plead "financial hardship," while the government employees don't get that excuse..."
# 81 by Poohbah

******************

Poohbah, can you see the conflict of interest here?

Police made the arrest, as they do in most cases.
Their lives would be affected by their rulings while on a jury.

Any government employee, not just a policeman, has an inherent conflict because he knows what his employer wants, and he has sound reasons to give more weight to the prosecution's case. He lives and works with the people who represent the government, and has both financial and social reasons to find the defendent guilty.

[exodus]

I'm willing to bet that you were not called to serve on a jury for second time. Fulfilling your duty as a juror is considered bad form by the folks who "choose" potential jurors.

[Roscoe]

The 5th Amendment was incorporated to the states by SCOTUS.

The 5th Amendment guarantee of a grand jury in criminal prosecutions doesn't apply to the states.

The 7th Amendment was incorporated to the states by SCOTUS.

The right to a jury for a civil trial under the Seventh Amendment doesn't apply to the states.

[Roscoe]

He sent to the press and to Jesse Ventura, a challenge to box him in public.

Stanley's quite the baffoon.

[exodus]

To: William Terrell
"...this is a sickening but unfortunate part of the judicial process, yes the Constitution can be excluded.

You as a defendent & your attorney cannot read the law/statute as it is printed on the books to the jury, you cannot read or refer to the Constitution as it is written, you as a juror cannot go out and research the case and any associated laws or discover anything on your own.

The judge can tailor and restrict the testimony and instuctions to the jury in any manner they see fit, to how ever it serves their agenda or their supporter's agenda the best.

This is true in all courts.
It is digusting and revolting more so than any crime,
the justice system is a criminal entity within itself,
serving itself, to perpetuate itself.
# 62 by chuknospam

******************

Good post, chuknospam.
It's worth repeating.

The defendent isn't allowed to use established law to protect himself, but the government can decide which laws apply, and tell the jury to ignore all conflicting law.

[Roscoe]

We can read the words of the Second Amendment ("...shall not infringe...").

Ignorance of our history and the basics of federalism impedes understanding.

"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws." -- John Adams

[Roscoe]

A juror becomes more impartial when he or she is informed that their job also entails judging the law in that case.

Begging the question.