Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jury finds that Jones's protest would breach peace
ABC ^ | 04/22/2011 | Staff

Posted on 04/22/2011 4:24:18 PM PDT by OldDeckHand

DETROIT (WXYZ) - The jury has found that a proposed protest by Quran-burning pastor Terry Jones outside the Islamic Center of America in Dearborn, the largest mosque in the United States, is likely to breach the peace and incite violence.

The jury has been debating since 3:30 p.m .Thursday. The main issue of the trial was whether or not Jones' main purpose was to say or do something that would incite violence.

(Excerpt) Read more at wxyz.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Michigan; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 1dollar; 1dollarbond; corruption; court; crusade; detroit; dhimmitude; donutwatch; freespeech; islam; jihad; jihadinamerica; jones; judicial; koran; march; moslemswin; muslim; muslimcancer; precrime; sharia; terryjones; trial
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-163 next last
To: kitkat
From link

The pair were tried under a rarely used law originally passed in 1846 that requires those who are likely to breach the peace to post "peace bonds."

81 posted on 04/22/2011 7:14:35 PM PDT by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

IANAL, but if the judge had offered me a choice of “judge, or jury” I’d have declined to choose, just to be on the safe side.
Otherwise they can say it’s a kangaroo court he “chose.”


82 posted on 04/22/2011 7:16:51 PM PDT by 668 - Neighbor of the Beast (0bama let Lt. Col. Lakin go to prison rather than show his paperwork.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

How can a jury and court be convened to find a “guilty verdict” before any action happens?

This jury was set up on thursday?


83 posted on 04/22/2011 7:18:42 PM PDT by neverbluffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Inciting violence means directing people TO violence, not being willing to suffer from people’s violence to YOU!


84 posted on 04/22/2011 7:37:43 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #85 Removed by Moderator

To: Responsibility2nd
“It is prior restraint, but the judge followed the letter of the law. It’s purely legal because it’s never been challenged.”

Sounds like it should be!

86 posted on 04/22/2011 8:15:01 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I am assuming this will be appealed? Anybody know?


87 posted on 04/22/2011 8:15:25 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
he was arrested because of what he might do.

Life imitates art.

88 posted on 04/22/2011 8:24:03 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

which goes to show, we’re not longer a nation of laws... just a nation of cute guidelines that will be inflicted upon the political enemies of the ruling party

so much for upholding the Constitution. their word is sh*t. treat them accordingly.


89 posted on 04/22/2011 8:43:03 PM PDT by sten (fighting tyranny never goes out of style)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

WOnder if they would restrain muslims for the same kinds of protests.

Seriously doubt it. They’d probably demand the church stop holding services.


90 posted on 04/22/2011 9:14:22 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

This is a repeat of the Illinois Nazis v. Skokie from the 70’s. Just replace religion of peace with Holocaust survivors in that case. It’s basic constitutional law that even a 2nd year law student would know.

It’s a prior restraint on free speech and I hope Dearborn has a good municipal insurance policy because they are going to owe Pastor Jones a lot of money when this gets overturned. For once I actually agree with the ACLU (and I can’t believe I’m saying that.)


91 posted on 04/22/2011 9:32:26 PM PDT by Feasor13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

Here’s a prior restraint case that’s similar to the current one...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_America_v._Village_of_Skokie


92 posted on 04/22/2011 9:34:20 PM PDT by Feasor13
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

Obama said this is NOT a Christian nation. You must have missed the speech.

You have Free Speech ... to the extent that it doesn’t offend people who will get violent with you. Then you’re “inciting” and you have no Free Speech.

If our free speech is limited by the sensibilities of others, then we have no free speech.

Have police go with the guy. Protect him. Let him have his First Amendment rights. Move on.

Where’s the ACLU on this one? Isn’t this exactly the type of case they hop in when it’s a leftist kook doing Piss Christ?


93 posted on 04/22/2011 9:36:23 PM PDT by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws
"Where’s the ACLU on this one? Isn’t this exactly the type of case they hop in when it’s a leftist kook doing Piss Christ?"

The ACLU filed an Amicus brief with the court earlier today. Also, I understand that both men will now be represented by the ACLU in their appeal. Unfortunately, the men represented themselves today. That was a mistake.

From what I understand, on several occasions, the trial judge asked if they would like to object, which would have preserved certain issues on appeal. Either they didn't understand the importance of such objections, or they didn't care. In any event, those errors will make it a bit more challenging for the ACLU. But still, it would be WILDLY unlikely these men don't prevail - either in state or, or eventually in federal court.

94 posted on 04/22/2011 9:44:36 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
"I am assuming this will be appealed? Anybody know?",

One of the Detroit TV stations is reporting that the ACLU will be representing both men in their appeal - FWIW.

I suspect it's likely we'll see an appeal, and later a civil action filed against Wayne County.

95 posted on 04/22/2011 9:49:38 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Gene Eric
Jones’s?

Jones’

Either is considered correct, but Strunk & White prefer Jones's (or did when I was in school).

96 posted on 04/22/2011 9:58:28 PM PDT by Kanakabaraka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 353FMG

“This is a Christian Nation....”

.
The Founders meant it to be that way, but they failed to state so in the Constitution.
Oh?

Then exactly what "Lord" were they talking about when they SIGNED AND SEALED The Constitution using THIS language (IN The Constitution)?


Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth. In Witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names...

97 posted on 04/22/2011 10:00:56 PM PDT by Don Joe ([expletive deleted])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Lawsuit City . . . some nice $$$ for deprivation of Constitutional rights


98 posted on 04/22/2011 10:10:34 PM PDT by A_Former_Democrat ("Celebrate 'Civility'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

This is really unbelievable.

The two groups that the left-wing will want to lock you up if you speak against them are Islamists and homosexual perverts.

Perverts, terrorists and democrats... perfect together.. oh my!


99 posted on 04/23/2011 12:27:55 AM PDT by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dangus

The Muslims are expected to react as if they are without responsibility for their own actions


100 posted on 04/23/2011 12:43:56 AM PDT by MNDude (so that's what they meant by Carter's second term)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-163 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson