8 votes

State legislator: NH governor should pardon jailed transparency activist

New Hampshire Republican state Rep. Mark Warden told The Daily Caller he thinks the state’s Democratic Gov. John Lynch should pardon Adam Mueller, who was sentenced on Monday to nearly three months in jail for recording conversations with police and school officials without their consent.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/16/state-legislator-nh-govern...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Our last defense against bad law, corrupt prosecutors & judges

Jury nullification is the last bastion against government power. If more jurors understood that they are acting as a buffer to protect their fellow citizens against the government exceeding its authority with bad or unconstitutional law then prosecutions for tax evasion, drug use, and other victimless crimes would halt. One of the reasons Prohibition failed in 1933 was that jurors stopped sending people to jail for drinking a beer or a glass of wine.

The jury is not a tool of the justice system used to sit in judgement of citizens accused of crimes. The jury system represents the fourth branch of government, the people. The jury is seated as the people's final protection defending the rights of the accused first, judging the law second, and trying the facts third. THE JURY IS INDEPENDENT OF THE COURT. The jury is there to insure that the other branches of government strictly comply with the authority granted to them by the people through their constitutions and traditions of fairness and justice.THE JURY KEEPS THE GOVERNMENT IN CHECK and a single citizen can do it with a single vote in criminal cases by consistently voting to acquit and hanging the jury.

Any judge that tells a jury that it cannot vote against his instructions is not being truthful. Any judge who tells a jury that it must decide only on the facts is not being truthful. Juries were trying the facts and the reasonableness of the law in England before the United States of America was born. Our system of laws is an extension of old English law.

Judges are the final arbiter of governmental power, their paycheck comes from a government, and it is in their interest to enhance that government's power. That is another reason why juries are seated.
To protect the accused from power corrupted, abusive, judges.

Something that has to be stopped is the state overstepping its authority and retrying cases with hung juries. A hung jury means that there was reasonable doubt . A hung jury was meant to be as good as an acquittal if the government could not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt to one juror, or, one or more jurors thought the law to be wrongly applied, unconstitutional or just plain dumb. No juror has to explain/defend his/her vote for acquittal.

http://fija.org/
lawreview.byu.edu/archives/1990/2/ber.pdfmises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_3.pdf
mises.org/journals/jls/15_2/15_2_3.pdf

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/16/state-legislator-nh-govern...

It only takes one to KEEP AMERICANS FREE. Know your duties & rights as a juror. Stop the unconstitutional conviction of innocents in federal custody. The Fully Informed Jury CALL 1-800-TEL-JURY www.fija.org IMMEDIATELY if not sooner. It's that important.

stupid Jurers

should of just said not guilty and its not a crime. some people in the community are scum.

Videotaping is an invasion of privacy

The idea that we abandon our right to privacy whenever we enter a "public space" is extremely dangerous and wrong. Complete privacy should be the "default setting" for every person in all circumstances.

The only exception to this rule should be for individuals employed by government.

Then There Is No Legal Basis For Charges

The accused was not taping a private citizen, he was taping public officials in the course of their duties. This is perfectly legal, and not a violation of privacy.

Adam didn't record the video,

Adam didn't record the video, it was captured by a student from a cell phone. He recorded audio of the phone calls he made questioning 3 public school employees about the incident in a media capacity (he runs a blog, copwatch.org). He was facing a total of over 20 years (7 years for each person) in jail for this "crime" which hurt who exactly? Keep in mind, the secretary who answered the phone and said about 3 words then transferred the call was one of the charges (felony wiretapping charges). One of the other "victims"; the principal, actually claimed during the trial that she is not a public employee!

And of course ultimately all of this was done because he was taking on the school and questioning their use of force. If he had called, recorded them while praising and supporting their actions then there would likely have been no charges.

Working for Liberty, Freedom and Prosperity in the Constitution State.
www.CT4L.com

reedr3v's picture

That act would put a lot of local nazis on notice

that their invasion of civil liberties is not acceptable.