Posted on 08/28/2015 10:02:05 PM PDT by nickcarraway
This argument is sketched out by Judge William Martinez in an order of his own. It's on view below in its entirety, but here's a key excerpt.
The Second Judicial District called Steven Steadman, who is the Colorado judicial branch’s security administrator. Steadman was closely involved in the discussions leading up to the Plaza Order. Steadman testified that, during those discussions, he was unaware of Brandt and Iannicelli or the distribution of jury nullification literature, and that the Plaza Order actually arose from very different concerns.
According to Steadman, discussions began with Chief Judge Martinez in early July 2015 because the Dexter Lewis trial was scheduled to overlap with another death penalty trial in Arapahoe County, i.e., the trial of Aurora theater shooter James Holmes. Steadman and Chief Judge Martinez specifically worried about potentially violent protests that might break out if Lewis (who is black) eventually received the death penalty but Holmes (who is white) did not.
To Lane, this argument is highly problematic. "In order to get ready for possible civil unrest, they sought to suspend the First Amendment," he says. "But what does eliminating free speech have to do with civil unrest? The answer, given by a federal judge, is nothing."
That's not quite how Judge William Martinez put it. In the main, he focuses on whether the order banning protests on the plaza was "narrowly tailored" to achieve its stated goal of preventing civil unrest if Dexter Lewis gets the death penalty — and he found that it was not. Another excerpt:
These are potentially “significant” government interests. Legitimate time-place-manner restrictions in a public forum can be motivated by “objectives [such as] public safety, accommodating competing uses of the easement, controlling the level and times of noise, and similar interests".... But the Court finds on this record that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed in proving that the Plaza Order is not narrowly tailored to these stated objectives. The case doesn't die there, since the plaintiffs plan to appeal the decision, and the office of Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman is expected to offer support.
Attorney David Lane. Attorney David Lane. File photo Lane doesn't think they'll have much success: "They'll have to file papers about why they think the judge is wrong, and the judge would have to say, 'Yes, I was wrong,'" he maintains. "The odds of that happening are pretty remote. So they'll immediately take it to the 10th Circuit and request a stay. But my guess is that the 10th Circuit will also deny the stay."
In the meantime, Lane is calling for the charges against Brandt and Iannicelli to be dropped — and he offers some harsh words about their arrest and the protest-banning order.
"The fact that government officials are fighting as hard as they can to suppress speech should be a wake-up call for Colorado citizens," he allows. "Why are your government officials trying to suppress speech? Why do we have to go to court repeatedly to vindicate the Constitution when these officials are sworn to uphold the Constitution? [Denver District Attorney] Mitch Morrissey should be ashamed of himself, and Cynthia Coffman should be ashamed of herself, too."
Update, August 26: A short time ago, David Lane reached out to the media with news that Denver police officers stopped jury nullification advocates from distributing pamphlets outside the Lindsey Flanigan courthouse despite the order allowing such activity. Here's what Lane wrote:
Outside the courthouse today. Our clients wasted no time in passing out jury nullification literature. The police wasted no time in swooping in after these photos were taken and confiscated the tent, chairs, coolers and other items. Back to federal court…unless Denver responds by noon today. The below email was sent to the attorney general and the city attorney:
Attached are two pictures taken this morning of peaceful pamphleteers passing out jury nullification literature. Moments after these pictures were taken, the Denver police swooped in, led by Commander Lopez and confiscated all of their property including the tent, the table, the chairs, their cooler and anything that was not nailed down. No arrests were made. The pampleteers were outside of the “no speech zone” as earmarked by Judge Michael Martinez which is not subject to his court order.
This is clearly retaliation for protected speech. If I don’t hear back from you by noon, we will re-file in federal court seeking a court order prohibiting the rank retaliation. The pictures clearly show that ingress/egress is not being blocked and there is no reason for this heavy handed police action.
I await your response.
Eric "****" Cops" Brandt's Latest Bust, Documents Judge Didn't Want You to See Denver Police Acted Like "Jack-Booted Thugs," Claims Top Cop Contempt Motion Reader: All Murderers Should Get the Death Penalty No Matter Their Skin Color He also included two photos of the set-up on the plaza prior to the police action. Here's the first....
Original post, 9:01 a.m. August 20: Last week, we told you that Eric "Fuck Cops" Brandt had been unable to meet a judge's deadline for removing documents about a police officer's threat from his Facebook page because he'd been jailed in Denver on a charge related to passing out jury nullification brochures in front of the Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse, where the Dexter Lewis death-penalty trial was taking place.
Since then, the case has taken some bizarre and, in the view of Brandt attorney and free-speech advocate David Lane, troubling turns.
Earlier this week, Lane filed documents (see them below) seeking to, in his words, "enjoin the city and the police from arresting people for handing out literature to passersby outside of the Denver courthouse informing them of the concept of jury nullification."
After a hearing on this issue was set for 2 p.m. Friday, August 21, Chief Judge of the Second Judicial District, Michael Martinez issued an order that banned any protest activities in the courthouse's plaza, whether they have to do with jury nullification or not.
This move incenses Lane, who has now affixed Judge Martinez's name to his previous complaint.
"He's stepped in it in a really big way," Lane says. He feels that "Judge Martinez's solution to speech he doesn't like is to eliminate all free speech."
In July, as we've reported, Brandt and Mark Iannicelli, who also faces charges from the Denver District Attorney's Office, set up camp outside the Lindsey-Flanigan Courthouse and were passing out fliers that featured phrases such as "Your Jury Rights: True or False? What rights do you have as a juror that THE JUDGE WON'T TELL YOU" and "All You Need to Know About Jury Nullification (but were prevented from hearing)."
Give them all death. You reap what you sow.
I am glad I don’t live in Denver anymore.
Trial by Twitter.
Somewhat reminiscent of “The Running Man”, with Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Damon Killian: This is television, that’s all it is. It has nothing to do with people, it’s to do with ratings! For fifty years, we’ve told them what to eat, what to drink, what to wear..
Just substitute politics and elections
I got a better idea.
Let Holmes, and Lewis share the same 8x10 cell 23 hours a day for a while.
Might solve the problem quicker than CO will even if they get the death penalty.
Update: He got life in prison.
He deserved death, but Denver-area juries don’t seem willing to do that. Part of it is politics, part of it is not.
This was different than James Holmes’ trial insofar as Holmes was/is nutty as squirrel poop, and this was a robbery by gang members that turned into a murder. The death penalty should have been an easy bet.
My guess is that Denver jurors are generally pretty fed up with the level of corruption and police brutality that happens there on a regular basis. I’d have to think once or twice myself before I sentenced someone to death up there after seeing the shenanigans that have gone on.
Better life in prison than killing someone the police have potentially set up.
Denver law enforcement desperately needs to clean up their act.
Holmes should have gotten the death penalty. He avoided it because of one liberal (I assume) juror who refused to vote for the death penalty. if there ever was someone who,should have gotten it, it was Holmes. He murdered 12 people and injured 70 others.
This guy Dexter, also deserves death. If these idiots protest, they are protesting liberal idiocy, not white racism. They would never see it that way because they’re morons.
I just read five not three - which was it?
BTW, here’s the guy:
This sounds like a repeat of Balto MD when Stephanie Rawlings-Blake allowed her constituents to run riot as she deemed it necessary and allowed her constituents to do as they damn well please and not conduct themselves in a orderly manner in protest of Freddie Grey’s death.
Rawlings-Blake presumably made a statement implying damage suffered would eventually be made good by insurance agencies .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqncWcpwmCs
Rawlings-Blake wanted her constituents to release their tensions-at the cost of the City of Baltimore.
Take a litle time to look up her bio and you will find Rawlings-Blake well educated and part of a class of people who are grandfathered (by virtue of education , social connections etc) into minor political office in predominately black cities.
If you recall - getting her to take a public stand on civil disobedience in her city at the time and to come to the microphone & implore people to cut the crap was really a bad scene because within 24hrs or less Gov Hogan appeared on the scene of his own accord. I can only compare Rawlings-Blake inaction to Queen Elizabeth holed up in Balmoral that Aug of many yrs ago to acknowledge
the death of Diana, POW- it was like pulling teeth
Rawlings-Blake never called Gov Hogan-he called her with words more or less as to “Why can’t you get your shit together & put the city in order?. Gov Hogan put it all back together and order was restored .
I will say Rawlings-Blake has a incomprable resting b*tch
face leaving The Mooch in the dust on that.
It was of significant disapointment to see Rawlings-Blake giving press confrences and still maintaing the resting b*tch face-she showed absolutely no emotion, sympathy, or passion & plea for people to stop the crap they were engaging in & not even a reaction-she did not emote.
When Rawlings-Blake took office she looked like this:
and she’s done well for herself in now maintaining a significant weight loss , new wardrobe more in keeping with her role as Mayor of Balto City and turned herself over (presumably) and funneled in to her allies in higher office in the State of Maryland, WashDC and to Al Sharpton’s network compadres.
http://www.hyscience.com/Stephanie%20Rawlings-Blake.jpg
In my opinion one of the reasons Rawlings-Blake did not step up to the plate at the time was because she KNEW about the plan for federalizing local law enforcement that has been touted by the Obama admin and the Dept of Justice.
I believe and it is my opinion she let people run wild is because Baltimore MD has a high percentage of African-Americans and to be used as a “test city” regarding Homeland Security involvement on a local level in implementing federal agendas and the UN agenda21
She was and is still following the party line according to Obama admin & all the rest of the African American agitator groups trying to stir up civil unrest.
It is widely known she sees herself as Mayor of Baltimore as a stepping stone in state or federal employment such as the Senate or Congress for example. She is definitely crafting her work as Mayor of Balto City to retire with a federal pension in the long run.
Now this leads me to another point-you must understand Rawlings-Blake is a Dem in a big Dem city. She’ll do her job but she has no real heart for Baltimore, she couldn’t give a rat’s ass about anyone or it’s citizens-she’s all about what her next move will be to her best benefit.
One of the reasons she did not pur her foot down and stop all the crap they were doing was because she knew before hand she could get federal monies-grant or otherwise to re-develop those areas and deprive legitimate store owners of their licenses for what ever they were selling/retailing.
And black Baltimore & the Mayor’s office does not support Korean business owners and it’s a well known fact in Balto African Americans do NOT like Koreans there is a huge amount of animosity there because the average, under-educated African American see the Koreans as a threat because they don’t “have” what the Koreans have; an income.
I would venture to guess the amount of federal money -ebt,sec 8, food stamps pours a high number of recipients who is unable to facilitate personal success and that my friend is the never-ending story and it’s a cycle that is happening nationwide.
To me the worse part is the state & federal govt’s are funding dying cities and this is one tough nut to crack. Rawlings-Blake is not a builder of consensus neither a individual to step out on a limb & develop plans in breathing back some life. She’s only here for her own
“ride” nothing more nothing less ahd couldn’t give a farthing.
And so the circle goes round & round and it never stops.
More on the sentencing:
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_28713843/jury-deliberating-feros-bar-massacre-trial
We can't have juries being fully informed, now, can we?
Cops doing the dirty work for judges, even when the free speech being exercised is clearly lawful.
Why should judges and police have to honor the law? After all, they're the ones with the badges and robes, along with the guns and the color of law to back them up!
Willfully depriving the People of their Rights under color of law is an egregious form of state criminality, plain and simple.
And those who willfully perpetrate such crimes should be aggressively prosecuted.
I'm really not aware of the facts on either of the two cases so I don't really have a specific opinion. But your comment above hit home with me in one respect.
If the laws of a state allow a death penalty case to be brought, then the jury selection should screen for the types you mention. My feeling is that a liberal zealot will lie in the screening anyway, but if the case is truly one of death and justice, then I believe potential jurors in these cases should be given a lie detector test.
I realize a LD test isn't a legally admissible exhibit in a court proceeding, but it is not out of the realm of the jury selection/strike process between prosecution and defense. This would just be adding one more party to the process - the law.
Richard Dawson owned his role.
I like the way you think.
Get a new governor, the new one then commutes the first sentence to death, both executions are carried out, problem solved.
Good. I like riots.
He looks like a thug. They should have gotten rid of him and Holmes, too.
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.
