Hi Tyranny Fighters:
PROGRESS REPORT, 12–9–11
We are now Living in Stalin’s Soviet Union.
The Congress has just passed a bill by overwhelming margins to permit the President to arrest and detain any person indefinitely without a trial whom he deems to be a threat to the country.
- Already it is the illegal immigrants and the presumed terrorists.
- Next it will be the militias and gun owners.
- Then the opposing press and intellectuals.
- Then a Democrat President will dispose of the far right.
- Then a Republican President will dispose of the far left.
- Then come the atheists, Zoroastrians, and Rastafarians.
- Then the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Shintos, and Mormons.
- Then the dissenting Christian clergy.
They will all be used as slave laborers until they die. If they do not die fast enough, then comes the gas chambers. Already the U. S. government is reopening the FEMA camps to house all of the new prisoners.
It only took about 15 years for Stalin and Hitler to accomplish this.
The good news is that I may die before they come for me.
Jury Tampering Case
As many of you know, I am being tried for jury tampering. On Monday, December 12, 2011, at 10:00 am, I was supposed to have a court hearing in front of Judge Kimba Wood at the U. S. District Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York , NY 10007. Presumably the only issue to be discussed was the Constitutionality of the indictment. However the hearing has been postponed, until when or why I do not know.
The U. S. Attorney’s position is that:
Jury nullification is legal, but that jurors are not to be informed of this.
It is permissible to distribute my literature in a public forum.
The plaza in front of the courthouse is not a public forum.
All of my pertinent submissions to the Court are posted on my web page at:
To make sense of this you need two other documents which are attached. They are:
- Memorandum of Law submitted by Sabrina Shroff
- Response to her Memorandum by the U. S. Attorney
Chronologically, they precede my letter to Judge Wood and Reply Memorandum of November 29, 2011.
I have prepared a new flyer to distribute at federal courthouses. It appears at the end of this E-mail for your comments.
Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP (c.k.a. Stroock) is an American law firm based in New York City with approximately 350 lawyers in three offices, the other two being in Miami and Los Angeles. Stroock, founded in 1876, maintained an office in Boston from 1996 to 2000 and briefly maintained an office in Budapest as well.
Stroock was named “Law Firm of the Year” by Securitization News in 2005.
Joel Cohen, a lawyer at Strroock & Stroock and Katherine A. Helm have written an article about jury nullification
much of which attacks me as a person. Of more concern is their ignorance of the law. They state that: “It is a doctrine that encourages jurors to decide cases irrespective of the law given to jurors during trial.” Actually jury nullification does not encourage jurors to decide cases irrespective of the law unless justice is not being served.
They also state “Runaway jury verdicts would amount to little more than a random 12-person vote, where each person could vote their conscience, their pocketbook, a flip of their coin, or what have you.” This is a deliberate falsehood. Jury nullification only requires that the issue of justice be predominant. They do not seem to be equally concerned that a judge, prosecuting attorney, the President, or a police officer can dismiss for any reason whatsoever.
They further write: “But, for the U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecuting him, on a misdemeanor charge, for violating Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 1504 (“Influencing Juror By Writing”), Heicklen was intentionally, and very directly, seeking to impede the legal process by stopping jurors in their tracks.” This statement is incorrect for two reasons:
- The statement in the code says: “influencing juror by writing or sending to him.” I do not send stuff to jurors.
- I do not stop jurors in their tracks. I do not even know who jurors are. I only distribute literature to people that approach me.
They go on to state: “The truth is: That’s not the law. Our justice system is based on jurors following the law as instructed by judges. As the 2nd Circuit made exquisitely clear in U.S. v. Thomas, 116 F.3d 606, 614 (2d Cir. 1997):” Actually the Constitutions of both New York and New Jersey require the jury to judge the law as well as the fact. Several U. S. Supreme Court decisions and opinions have upheld this view.
This article is interesting for several reasons. Much of it attacks me as a person, which is irrelevant. The authors are completely ignorant of the Constitutional requirements for the Jury. They incompletely quote a statement in a statute to alter its meaning. They are willing to permit me to discuss my ideas where no jurors are present, in what are often called free speech zones. That is a euphemism which means where no-one interested in the information will be present.
The article was written by a lawyer in the “Law Firm of the Year,” a law firm with 350 lawyers and branches in several U. S. cities, presumably with the sanction of that firm. Is this the best that the legal profession can provide?
The Free Dictionary defines judiciary as “A system of courts of law for the administration of justice.” Most lawyers and all judges consider the purpose of a judicial system is to uphold the law, when its real purpose is to deliver justice. Law is only the means to that end, not the end in itself.
Michael Allison was charged with five counts of eavesdropping in Illinois because he took pictures of police making arrests. Each charge carries a 15-year sentence, so Allison could have spent 75 years in prison. Subsequently the charges have been dropped. In 12 states it is a crime to photograph police making arrests.
THE PRICE OF LIBERTY IS IMMEDIATE VIGILANCE
THE PRICE OF JUSTICE IS IMMEDIATE PUBLICITY
The time is now. Tomorrow will be too late. Yours in desperation—Julian