36 votes

RARE: Justice Prevails! CA Jury finds Bankster Chalk Protester NOT 'Guilty' on ALL Charges!

Man Tried for Chalk Drawings Found Not Guilty

By Christina London
Monday, Jul 1, 2013
Updated 3:14 PM PDT

Protestors chalked the sidewalk outside the Hall of Justice Saturday. They feel Jeff Olson's (left corner) free speech rights were violated when he was charged with vandalism for writing protest messages in chalk outside banks.

The man accused of vandalism for drawing with chalk outside banks has been found not guilty on all charges.

A jury returned its verdict in the case against Jeff Olson Monday.

The city charged Olson with vandalism after writing anti-Wall Street messages in chalk on public sidewalks and streets in front of a bank.

Olson’s supporters staged a “Chalk-u-py” protest last Saturday. They wrote messages of support in sidewalk chalk outside the Hall of Justice.

*** Love it when my fellow citizenry actually decide to exercise common sense and justice, and morality vs. aberrant State thugs (triple redundancy, I know)!

H/T: InfoWars

Comment viewing options

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

Many Good Lawyers will tell you that all court battles like this

are WAY more political than actually about the Rule of Law.

I think the same goes with the kid with his stand with his 2nd amendment T-shirt.

Both cases would have ruled in favor of the Establishment had there not been public outcry.

The very same thing would happen to the tax code if people took a similar stand.

you mean you think there are many who would tell you that

If politics was going to influence it, in favor of acquittal, then the case would have been not filed in the first place, or perhaps dropped.

I believe politics DID affect it in that the case was filed. Politics between a bank and city hall.

But I think the jury decided based upon the facts and the law. Perhaps even in spite of the judge (it happens sometimes). Not because of political pressure. I think that really demeans and diminishes the jurors' roles here. The system wanted a conviction over this chalk nonsense and these people said no. You should honor that by NOT saying the jurors folded to political pressure.

There are numerous cases where juries refused public perception pressure to render unpolular verdicts! Hello, Casey Anthony!

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Actually we are saying the same exact thing,

But are using different definitions, and perhaps I'm at fault for not extolling the virtues to the jury for a job well done.

Actually I'm extolling the virtues of you ALL. You make my point!!!

Politics of CULTURE is always more important than words on a piece of paper. America USED to respect the Constitution, but GW was right, it's just a GD piece of paper if the people don't respect it.

If the Chalk criminals had paid their fine, it would have been the end. City Win. If people hadn't stood up with them, it would have been the end. City Win. The fact that the Chalk criminals stood up, and others did as well, City Loses. Enough City loses, and City changes attitude.

Politics DID change it, and running for office had nothing to do with anything. Your politics also made a dent in the Corrupt Culture.

Gotham City

Holy Crapola Batman, The whole city's been chalked!
Stop talking and start chalking Boy Wonder!

Chalksters vs. Banksters

Chalk one up for liberty..

BOOM!

I'm really glad to see this posted here

for a lot of reasons.

1. It shows that you can prevail in court when you're right by arguing the facts and the law (actual law, not make-believe law).

2. It shows that while the courts are messed up, they're not as messed up as the exagerators of the cyberspace will tell you.

3. It didn't involve any insane "I am not my person" mumbo jumbo or claims that it was an admiralty court.

4. San Diego has long had a court system that is overly influenced by moneyed interests as well as a history of govt corruption. Good to see that faction on the losing end, yet again!

5. Hopefully this will empower people to fight when charged with a crime they did not commit.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Good

news!

The mayor thought it was a ridiculous case and should be dropped

I saw a video with Bob Filner talking about this. He thought the whole thing was ridiculous that the city had to get involved and that it had to cost taxpayer dollars. He said something along the lines of, "It's a 1st amendment case.. and it was chalk..."

SWEET!!!

SWEET

Love Liberty, be Vigilant

"Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty" (2 Corinthians 3:17)

Faith in God will prevail all things!

A couple days ago I sent an email to 'cityattorney@sandiego.gov'

It read:
Subject: The Federal Reserve and International Bankers are pillaging America

YOU SHOULD be arresting the criminals at the FED and on Wall-Street. It’s beyond a CRIME for you to prosecute a man for using sidewalk chalk to help spread a message that the Main Stream Media will not broach.

You should be fired!

Super Cool!

Hopefully this'll help my appeal for being convicted of chalking! As CA goes, so goes the nation???

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

hopefully so!

technically this case actually may have been a jury nullification...while the definition of what "vandalism" is, is always determined by and at the state thugs' discretion, the jury most likely ignored 'their' interpretation!

plus, it's an utterly ridiculous notion to lock your fellow American for 7 yrs, for something your 3yo child does on your own driveway, which gets washed away in less than 2minutes out in the rain.

I saw a video of the scumfcuk Saturnian Cult dragqueen's smug statement declaring how this washable chalk is vandalism, last week against the accused. The utter contempt he had for the accused, as if he was about to preside over a case involving torturer or rapist or murderer was sickening!

Only if these same a-holes could exercise such indignant rage vs. ACTUAL criminals like commissars/politicians & their Praetorian Guards, corporatists, and actual murderers and warcriminals like GWB and oBUSHma et al...

so disgusting watching these scumbags get all huff and puff over utter nonsense, as if they're actually doing some noble work.

hey, who knows? perhaps the rightful disgust/rage vs. banksters is finally beginning to hit even the most acquiescent of sheeples' noggins...

one can only hope this 'pandemic' spreads far and wide!

PS. Ira, is yours in NH? Is there a "Chalk-u-py" planned for you? Where are all your local supporters? Are they as determined? Hopefully so, brother. Hopefully so.

I pray your jury is as common sensical and JUST!

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Your kind is the reason poeple like this arent vurning

in there graves...

Don't feed the pandas. Ever.

not quite accurate

the definitions of major common crimes in most jurisdictions (and definitely in Cali) are contained in pre-printed jury instruction books, CALJIC I believe is the set for Cal criminal cases. The definition doesn't change according to the "discretion" of the all-powerful bad guys, rather, it stays the same.

See:

http://www.courts.ca.gov/partners/documents/calcrim_juryins.pdf

See instruction 2900 on Vandalism:

The defendant is charged [in Count ] with vandalism [in
violation of Penal Code section 594].
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must
prove that:
1. The defendant maliciously (defaced with graffiti or with other
inscribed material[,]/ [or] damaged[,]/ [or] destroyed) (real/ [or]
personal) property;
[AND]
2. The defendant (did not own the property/owned the property
with someone else)(;/.)

[AND
3. The amount of damage caused by the vandalism was $400 or
more.]
Someone acts maliciously when he or she intentionally does a wrongful
act or when he or she acts with the unlawful intent to annoy or injure
someone else.
Graffiti or other inscribed material includes an unauthorized inscription,
word, figure, mark, or design that is written, marked, etched, scratched,
drawn, or painted on real or personal property.
New January 2006; Revised June 2007, February 2013
BENCH NOTES
Instructional Duty
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of
the crime.
If the defendant is charged with a felony for causing $400 or more in damage and
the court is not instructing on the misdemeanor offense, give element 3. If the court
is instructing on both the felony and the misdemeanor offenses, give CALCRIM
No. 2901, Vandalism: Amount of Damage, with this instruction. (Pen. Code,
§ 594(b)(1).) The court should also give CALCRIM No. 2901 if the defendant is
charged with causing more than $10,000 in damage under Penal Code section
594(b)(1).
687 (Pub. 1284)
This version provided by LexisNexis® Matthew Bender®, Official Publisher, 800-533-1637,
www.lexisnexis.

So as you can see, there are many ways this could have been defeated without needing to nullify, in this particular case.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Or

I could be the jury were annoyed with jury duty and wanted to punish the State for bothering them.

Still, another reason we all need to serve on juries. It's where our one vote really counts.

What do you think? http://consequeries.com/