but she didn't explain shit
“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
My impression is that the whole story is not being told. I would hold off call bombing a jail and making a fool of yourself without knowing the facts. Just because she believes in Freedom doesn't make me want to defend a crime that may have been committed.
I admire a person who can own up to their mistakes without placing the blame on others or deflecting personal responsibility with evasive language. People need to admit their mistakes and if your legal defense precludes you from that then fine...but don't go out of your way to make a video to deceive those who support you.
Sounds fishy to me.
It appears you made a mistake and now finding yourself caught in the crooked justice system.
The shame of the system is none of it is designed to actually cure any problems. It is designed to collect money.
Be careful the system has a way of getting a hold of a person and never letting go. Meaning probation or court orders followed by breaking probation or contempt of court charges for meaningless small offenses. Something as simple as traveling a hundred feet to far (to a store that is on the wrong side of a county line.) Many of the rules that are imposed have nothing to do with stopping DUI they are imposed to generate revenue.
"I was unaware..." Amanda, you are the driver, it is your responsibility to know what is in your vehicle.
"I had my wits about me..", so, does this mean that you drank and felt fine, that you were just coming down from just being buzzed...or did you not drink at all?
If you did not drink at all, then why not say that on your video?
If you drank, and had open intoxicants in the vehicle (knowingly or unknowingly) then you gave them a reason to arrest you.
Any act or demonstration of how to handle yourself in the presence of an officer was overshadowed by these two issues.
While I am sure that some individuals on here are behind you and think that what you did was brave, I can imagine that there are a few parents with dead children who probably do not.
Lastly, I have too have made bad choices in similar ways, and have visited my local Detroit 8 x 8 play pen. I am in no way judging you, but if you drank, your lucky to able to make that video.
"No army can stop an idea whose time has come"
..but I'm not gonna jump on the band-wagon all willy-nilly before I know exactly what actually happened. People can make mistakes, and she may have.
"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." -- James Madison
They can arrest Adam Kokesh. He is powerful enough to work through that situation. But if they imprison Amanda Billyrock then that is just too far.
So the police entirely fabricated the open container and drunk driving charge?
The video she posted seemed to suggest otherwise.
If anyone wants to find another copy of that video it's not hard. Around 9:00 is where the cop notices the bottle of gin. You can also find summaries of the video and discussion of whether it was a good idea or not to post it by googling her name and "open container of gin" and so on.
They do that often.
the original video of the arrest on Youtube which her lawyer asked her to take down. It seems her lawyer is playing the game "don't make them mad and they might be nice to you." But if there is nothing to hide on the video then it will only help her case. In Boston a protester at a Donald Rumsfeld speech was arrested for assaulting a police officer, and it was all on video, and clear as day that the cops were lying. The charges were dropped because the whole world knew the charges were bogus.
I urge Amanda to reconsider. These lawyers are often not working only for you. They go in front of the same judges day in day out and have to play ball to some extent.
Release the Sandy Hook video.
dashcam video should make it pretty apparent whether she had been drinking or not, and whether they had probable cause to think she had been drinking or if that was just based on her refusing to answer questions... I assume once they took her in they did an actual blood test for the alcohol? if she appears intoxicated in the dashcam video, then the bloodwork should be admissible; if she doesn't, then maybe it shouldn't. hope she's got a good lawyer
drinking and driving is not a victimless crime just because they happen to catch you before you create a victim--it's the same as if you were to start firing off a gun in a crowded area... just because you don't happen to hit anyone, doesn't mean it's a victimless crime... i know the idea of a potential victim can be a slippery slope to police state, but at the basic level of drunk driving it's a totally legitimate point. so IF she was drinking she should own up to it and face the consequences. I had to do that myself when I made the stupid mistake of getting a DUI and I know it's hard to own up to it. I know the motivation to want to do anything you can to get out of the consequences, so I really hope she's not trying to use her liberty philosophy and connections to try to wriggle out of it if she was, in fact, intoxicated... it's something that the best of us might be tempted to in such a situation... honestly, only with the dash cam could we know for certain. good luck to her regardless.
Unless there is a victim there is no victim! DUI in almost every case is victimless with the vast majority of DUI arrests having no accident, no property damage, and no injuries. All prior restraint laws involve victimless crimes. Just because you find the act unsavory doesn't change the fact that there is no victim when they charge someone with a crime without a victim. Who's the victim, the state??? Boo Hoo poor state victim.
There is no crime unless there is an offended party! I used to hear on the radio all the time that drunk driving is a premeditated violent crime! Now they have changed that to Buzzed driving! here in Oregon, it is up to the cop to determine if you are drunk no matter the outcome of the breathalizer. I had a friend that was convicted with a .04%, and he was walking. They said they had a witness that said they believed he was driving drunk before he started walking! Unbelievable.
I used to think what you did but then I realized just how bad and selfish the average sober driver is.
Do you think pilots (say flying alone) should be able to drink alcohol? Or take LSD and fly, or people go to the shooting range on ambien? I agree the legal limits are too low and checkpoints are a violation of the 4th but most people are terrible if you allow them to be. People who drink and drive are making a bad mistake.
Laws for safety are a collective mindset. "Those who would give up essential Liberty for the purchase of temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
This world is not safe no matter what law they put in place. With Individual Liberty comes great Responsibility. If you allow yourself to get drunk and cause someone to lose their life, you have violated their right to life and therefore should lose all you have. Up until that happens, you should be free to make whatever choices you want, you just have to be responsible, if not, you face the consequences. My opinion.
So say I like to hunt with a machine gun while drinking whiskey. I also have great intuition, so I hunt blindfolded. I haven't killed anybody yet. To you, there's nothing wrong with this?
I would agree if the first time I injured someone, I got life in prison.
Either the penalties for DUI would need to be one hundred times worse or maybe a situation where there's a reasonable compromise (like now).
Where you have to pay the psychos 200 wfrn for the privalege of getting an intrusive FBI background check in order to think about purchasing a machine gun. That's your idea of a reasonable compromise?
People have been banned from DP for posting drunk.
When government owns stuff they fail six ways to Sunday.
Free includes debt-free!
Up until that happens, you should be free to make whatever choices you want, you just have to be responsible, if not, you face the consequences.
Suppose someone is doing something that endangers you, without your consent, such that it's only a matter of time until they will eventually kill you. Let's say it's a 50/50 chance of killing you, and they do whatever this endangering action is once a day. You've lucked out two days in a row but there's a better than 99% chance you'll be dead a week from now. Are they not violating the NAP, until the day inevitably comes that they actually do kill you, at which time your family can sue them?
As for collectivism, I'm against faraway federal collectivism or global collectivism. But locally and state-wide, there are a lot of "collectivist" laws that are inevitable.
Go to Wal-Mart, then tell me you want these people to drive with as much alcohol (or meth) as they deem reasonable, and only penalize them if they damage property, hurt or kill someone. Sorry, I'm cynical.
Was it OK for the court to ruin my friends life with a .04 while walking? Smoking laws; taking away the right of a business owner to do what he pleases in his own establishment? How about proposed laws to ban smoking in your personal vehicle or the entire town you live in? Seatbelt laws! The list will be endless. A law, even at the state level, that takes away any individuals freedom of personal choice, in my opinion, is a step towards a collective government. Nobody will ever change my opinion on that.
You bring up good points. I'm against DUIs for low BACs. And I'm against seat belt laws. I just have lost faith in people :)
And I don't think you should drink any amount of alcohol and drive. The punishment for 0.04-0.10 could be less but again, I don't trust the average person to make the correct choice.
"I don't trust the average person to make the correct choice."
You may want to rethink your liberty position.
I love you. I'm sorry. Please forgive me. Thank you.
http://fija.org - Fully Informed Jury Association
http://jsjinc.net - Jin Shin Jyutsu (energy healing)
You might want to discuss this in real-life with those in the liberty movement. If you think my position is rare, you must not know many people or know much about the history of liberty.
Drivers who drink and do damage should pay higher premiums.
Or lose their vehicle to the injured party.
Owners of private roads could band drivers in order to protect their customers.
Updated: Drop Amanda BillyRock's Criminal Charges | No Victim, No Crime
Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My Bitcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
Man was made for joy and woe
Then when this we rightly know
Through the world we safely go.
Joy and woe are woven fine
A clothing for the soul divine.
when your arms are twisted up and around your back is enough to get you charged with "resisting" arrest. STOP RESISTING!! STOP RESISTING!!
Daughter of 1776 American Revolutionists