U.S. Constitution
See other U.S. Constitution Articles
Title: Judge Threatens To Impose A “Secret Jury” After Activists Try to Inform Jurors of Legal Rights
Source:
Free Thought Project
URL Source: http://thefreethoughtproject.com/ju ... -ross-ulbricht-silk-road-case/
Published: Jan 15, 2015
Author: John Vibes
Post Date: 2015-01-15 12:51:33 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 3894
Comments: 14
New York City, New York – According to multiple reports, Judge Katherine Forrest has threatened to impose a secret jury in the case of accused Silk Road operator Ross Ulbricht, in response to jury nullification outreach that has been taking place outside the courtroom all week. For those who don’t know, jury nullification is basically the right for any juror to not only judge the facts of the case, but to also actually judge the validity of the law itself. This means that if a jury feels that a defendant is facing an unjust charge, they actually have the right to rule in the defendant’s favor, even if they are technically guilty under the court’s standards. However, authorities in the court system prefer that this fact is unknown by jurors, so they can continue to persecute people for nonviolent, victim-less crimes. In the case of Ross Ulbricht, Judge Forrest has went through great lengths to see that the jury will not be fully informed about their rights to judge the legitimacy of the law. Not only has the judge dismissed a number of jurors because they were made aware of jury nullification, but she has also now threatened to impose a secret jury if activists don’t stop their jury outreach. According to jury rights activist James Babb, “Basically, she decreed that if the independent volunteers didn’t stop informing jurors of their right to nullify unjust and misapplied laws, she would “annonymize” the jury, bussing them in from a secret location, blocking their contact from the outside world. Of course, the jurors won’t be told that they are being “protected” from a 100% factual pamphlet about their indisputable rights. Instead, they will thank the judge for protecting them from a dangerous crime boss.” Sadly, the activists are now left with very few options to inform jurors of their full legal rights. “After careful consideration, we have decided to postpone the pamphleting operation until the hostage is recovered safely. However, the offending judge will not be forgotten. She will become accustomed to dealing with informed jurors. We will not be intimidated. We will not abandon our mission. Forrest’s grumpiness confirms what we already knew. They are scared of the truth. They fear for their house of cards,” Babb said. Derrick Broze was on location for The Liberty Beat and reported that “Day two of the Ross Ulbricht trial began on Wednesday morning with the prosecution continuing to question DHS agent and apparent Silk Road mole Jared Deryeghiayan. Lead prosecutor Serrin Turner presented several screenshots related to criminal activity on the Silk Road. He asked Deryeghiayan to explain each exhibit and how it related to illegal activity, including the purchase of illicit drugs and fraudulent documents.” “While it has been demonstrated that drugs were in fact trafficked through the Silk Road, charges of conspiracy to traffic in hacking software and stolen passports have yet to be substantiated by the government. Even if the prosecution proves that drugs, fraudulent documents, and hacking software/services were in fact trafficked through Silk Road, they must still demonstrate that at the time of the alleged illegal activity, Ulbricht was acting as Dread Pirate Roberts, the Silk Road administrator,” he added.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
#1. To: Deckard, All (#0)
Duh! Is this something new? I thought not. Judges order the seclusion (sequestering) of juries all the time. This article is nothing but yellow journalism at its finest in that it presents no legitimate well-researched factual news. Instead it goes for exaggerations and wordy sensationalism to flavor facts with total disregard for the truth. Such conduct is easily recognizable as both unprofessional and unethical. Move along, folks … nothing here to see!
Ignorance of the law is no excuse - unless you are a cop, judge or Gatlin. According to jury rights activist James Babb, “Basically, she decreed that if the independent volunteers didn’t stop informing jurors of their right to nullify unjust and misapplied laws, she would “annonymize” the jury, bussing them in from a secret location, blocking their contact from the outside world.
#3. To: Deckard (#2)
Ignorance of the law is no excuse - unless you are a cop, judge or Gatlin. How is sequestering considered to be ignorance of the law? Where have I been ignorant of the law? Didn't you say you had me on bozo?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestBasically, she decreed that if the independent volunteers didn’t stop informing jurors of their right to nullify unjust and misapplied laws, she would “annonymize” the jury, bussing them in from a secret location, blocking their contact from the outside world.
#2. To: Gatlin (#1)
I thought not. Judges order the seclusion (sequestering) of juries all the time.
Replies to Comment # 2. I thought not. Judges order the seclusion (sequestering) of juries all the time.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 2.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]