Tuesday, October 27, 2015

The Most Petty of Tyrants; The Incarceration of Inmate 445

When is the state allowed to jail you for “unauthorized” speech?

Two people were jailed in Noblesville, Indiana today for political expression done on public property using chalk. This is the same stuff kids have fond memories using on public sidewalks and streets for years. Why were these men jailed while criminal children run amok? Because the content of the speech was unauthorized by state and local governmental power.

The violation of rights becomes more apparent and egregious when it comes to light that the persons jailed for these “offenses” are activists who attempt to right the wrongs of law-enforcement when they abuse their power. 

 So what happened? And why does everyone who receives a paycheck from taxpayers feel they have no ability to stop the process of rights violations?

A friend of mine posted that she was on the scene of this initial hearing and told me where to meet her. “Courtroom 7, second floor” the message read.

I arrive and see Ademo Freeman’s face on a large screen TV asking the judge why it is that he cannot answer questions regarding his charges. Behind Ademo sat an incredibly obese cop who is slouched at a 45-degree angle with a look of lethargic exasperation on his face. 

At one point the judge wanted to establish whether or not Ademo would be declaring himself an indigent in the face of the state and getting a public defender or if he had his own representation. 

“I’ll represent myself,” was the gist of Ademo's replied. 

The judge then attempted to verify Ademo's understanding that if he were self-represented and the prosecution mismanaged procedure, violated police, etc that no one from the court would help him in that regard (I apologize for any inaccuracies here, an officer approached me and made sure I wasn’t recording. Recordings would be on sale tomorrow for 55 dollars). 

Ademo wondered aloud what exactly the court was there for.

In my head I imagined “blind justice” and knew the stuttering judge wanted only to read from the paper propped on his desk.

The judge finally moved the process along to the point where it was time to re-read the papers in front of him to co-defendant Brian Sumner. The judge reiterated that he couldn’t answer any specifics of why Brian was being arrested but did say “Would you like me to read the charges.”

“Save your breath,” Brian replied. Brian inquired whether this particular judge had the right to dismiss the charges against him. 

“No, I do not” the judge said. The judge was there to read from the papers sitting in front of him and assure some king of cognizance on the part of those they were caging. 

I’m not sure the exact wording of what went down next. Constitutional rights and free speech was mentioned but Brian said something that shut the judge up for a good few seconds when he said “If you can sit behind that desk and justify yourself ‘May God have mercy on your soul.’” 

The judged wrapped up as quickly as he could after he contemplated his role in the violation of rights he was a party to.

(The audio will be available tomorrow for a more accurate summary).

No comments:

Post a Comment