Denver Police Arrest "Jury Nullification" Activist For Passing Out Informational Pamphlets

[Lucille]

Denver Police Arrest "Jury Nullification" Activist For Passing Out Informational Pamphlets

http://fija.org/

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...-activist-passing-out-informational-pamphlets

Most of you will be familiar with the concept of jury nullification. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans are not. This is precisely why Mark Iannicelli set up a “Jury Info” booth outside the Lindsay-Flanigan Courthouse in Denver. In a nutshell, jury nullification is the idea that jurors can “can ignore the law and follow their conscience when they believe the law would dictate a miscarriage of justice.” In other words, jurors have the right to judge the law as well as the facts. As you will see in the video at the end, this concept has centuries of precedence in these United States behind it.

When you recognize the vast power that such a concept holds, you recognize why it would be so hated by statists and authoritarians across the land. That is precisely why Mr. Iannicelli was arrested and charged with handing out information.

For a little background, read the following from the Denver Post:

Denver prosecutors have charged a man with seven counts of jury tampering after they say he tried to influence jurors by passing out literature on jury nullification on Monday.

Mark Iannicelli, 56, set up a small booth with a sign that said “Juror Info” in front of the city’s Lindsay-Flanigan Courthouse courthouse, prosecutors say.

The Denver District Attorney’s Office says Iannicelli provided jury nullification flyers to jury pool members.

Jury nullification is when jurors believe a defendant is guilty of the charges but reject the law and return a not guilty verdict.

In response to what appears to be a clear attack on freedom of speech, the Denver Post editorial board published an admirable defense of Mr. Iannicelli several weeks after his arrest. Here are a few excerpts:

It is astonishing that Denver police would arrest someone for handing out political literature outside a courthouse.

It’s even more astonishing that prosecutors would charge that person with seven felony counts of jury tampering.

Now, fortunately, civil rights attorney David Lane has filed a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of other jury nullification activists. They want an injunction to stop the city from violating their First Amendment rights should they too wish to pass out literature.

They deserve to get one.

Jury nullification is understandably controversial — and is especially resented by courts and prosecutors. It is the notion that jurors can ignore the law and follow their conscience when they believe the law would dictate a miscarriage of justice. But it is hardly a new concept.

In the 19th century, Northern juries refused to convict abolitionists for harboring runaway slaves. In the 20th century, juries often balked at enforcing Prohibition and later, on occasion, at what they considered overly harsh drug laws or laws governing sexual behavior.

Jury nullification had a darker strain, too, as Southern juries would sometimes refuse to convict white defendants guilty of racial violence.

The point is that jury nullification is not some crank theory concocted out of the blue.

As First Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh has written, “It’s clear that it’s not a crime for jurors to refuse to convict even when the jury instructions seem to call for a guilty verdict.” [...]

So where do things stand now?

The good news is that Denver’s city attorney has come to the aid of the activists, setting up a fight between him and the district attorney. Once again, from the Denver Post:

Denver’s city attorney has directed the police and sheriff’s department to stop arresting people passing out jury nullification literature in front of the courthouse.

The order was revealed Friday in U.S. District Court during a hearing involving a lawsuit against the city and Denver police chief Robert White.

The lawsuit was filed earlier this month on behalf of activists who want to distribute jury nullification information outside the Lindsey-Flanigan courthouse. They sued after two others who were handing out pamphlets were charged with seven counts of jury tampering by District Attorney Mitch Morrissey.

The lawsuit argues that the arrests are a violation of free speech rights and asks for a federal injunction against further arrests.

The lawsuit also named Denver Chief Judge Michael Martinez, who on Thursday issued an order barring demonstrations, protests, distributing literature, proselytizing and other activities on the courthouse grounds.

City Attorney Scott Martinez said his staff argued that the Denver judge’s order was overly broad. They also argued against arrests targeting people handing out jury nullification literature.

The city attorney’s office also has taken a position that their actions do not violate state law.

“We agree that the court house steps are a public forum and that people can pass out information, including pamphlets, in accordance with the First Amendment,” the city attorney said.

The city attorney’s position is unusual in that it is siding with the very people who are suing the city. It also pits the city attorney’s office against the district attorney’s office, which filed criminal charges.

Well done Mr. Martinez.

If you want a little more info on jury nullification, check out the following video featuring a much younger Ron Paul:

 

[Lucille]

http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/26/denver-concedes-distributing-jury-nullif

So does that mean Denver District Attorney Mitch Morrissey plans to drop the jury tampering charges against Iannicelli and Brandt? Not according to Lynn Kimbrough, Morrissey's public information officer. "Their charges still stand," she says. "They weren't arrested for passing out literature. They certainly have a free speech right to do that." Rather, Kimbrough says, quoting Colorado's jury tampering statute, they were arrested for seeking to "communicate with a juror" outside of a judicial proceeding in an attempt to influence the juror's "vote, opinion, decision, or other action in a case." But neither the affidavits supporting the arrests nor the charges from Morrissey's office allege that Iannicelli or Brandt tried to affect the outcome of any particular case. The affidavits mention the Dexter Lewis trial, but Lane says his clients did not even know it was happening.

The affidavits also say Iannicelli and Brandt handed people pamphlets after asking if they had been called for jury duty. The pamphlets received by seven jury pool members were the basis for the seven charges against each defendant. Is asking what brings someone to the courthouse the crucial difference between what Denver deems a crime and what it recognizes as constitutionally protected activity? Kimbrough won't say. When I press her to explain exactly how Iannicelli and Brandt crossed the line, she says she can't get into specifics about a pending criminal case. But she does say "there isn't anything in the federal judge's ruling that directly affects the allegations against these defendants."

Lane, not surprisingly, disagrees. He predicts the charges "will eventually be dropped." Either way, Morrissey has some explaining to do. If "peacefully handing out jury nullification literature to or discussing jury nullification with passersby at the Plaza, without more, does not violate Colorado law," what was the justification for arresting and charging Iannicelli and Brandt? What "more" did they supposedly do that transformed them from citizens exercising their First Amendment rights into criminal suspects?

 

[DamianTV]

Disempowering the Juries is a form of removal of power over the Govt from the People.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Land of the free.

 

[Lucille]

I imagine all the press this is getting is reaching more people than the activists would have just handing out literature. Dumbass statists. LOL

When you recognize the vast power that such a concept holds, you recognize why it would be so hated by statists and authoritarians across the land.

Denver Police Continue Harassing Jury Nullification Activists, One Day After a Federal Judge Told Them to Cut It Out
According to the cops, a stack of pamphlets is an illegal "encumbrance."
http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/27/denver-police-continue-harassing-july-nu

Yesterday morning, according to a new motion filed by the lawyer representing Eric Verlo and Janet Matzen, the two activists who sought the injunction, "a cadre of Denver police officers" descended upon them and several associates as they were engaged in exactly the sort of pamphleting described in the injunction. The lawyer, David Lane, says the cops seized "all literature regarding jury nullification including about 1,000 pamphlets, a small shade shelter, a table, four chairs, buckets, a cooler, signs and other items." He adds that the officers even "attempted to take personal property such as purses, computers, backpacks and other items" from the activists, but "the pamphleteers resisted the attempts by the police to steal their personal property."

The official justification for this raid is that the seized items constituted illegal "encumbrances of the right-of-way" under Denver's municipal code. The code does not define that term, Lane says, so police "have decided that anything and everything in the possession of the Plaintiffs and their associates is an 'encumbrance' and may be removed."

[...]
"The Denver police, acting as jack-booted thugs in blatant violation of this Court's Order, came into the plaza and began seizing all property not being carried by a pamphleteer. The only plausible explanation for this is that the police were acting in retaliation for the exercise of the free speech rights of the pamphleteers."

The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA), which produces the pamphlets distributed by Verlo and Matzen, joined them in their lawsuit, and plans to hold a Jury Rights Day event at the courthouse on September 4, reports that the activists' property had not been returned as of last night. "When one of the juror rights educators went to the police department to inquire what was the reason for the delay in returning the stolen property," FIJA says, "he was told that property owners must identify their property to retrieve it."

A pattern seems to be developing. Yesterday I noted that Denver, even while admitting that distributing jury nullification pamphlets near a courthouse is constitutionally protected, is still prosecuting two activists, Mark Iannicelli and Eric Brandt, for distributing jury nullification pamphlets near a courthouse. The official charge against Iannicelli and Brandt is jury tampering, but the Denver District Attorney's Office won't explain how their actions, which were not aimed at influencing the outcome of any particular case, qualified for that description, or how they differed from the peaceful pamphleting the city says "does not violate Colorado law." Now police are continuing to harass the very activists the city promised to leave alone, on the pretext of enforcing a vaguely worded prohibition. It seems Denver is willing to tolerate jury nullification activists in theory but not in practice.

 

[pmbug]

Sounds just like the Heicklen case from 4 years ago (in NY) all over again. Really glad to see FIJA (and these activists) still educating people.

 

[Lucille]

Yes, and that case was dismissed.

“But it has a much broader impact,” he said, “because there are people all around the country who do exactly what he was doing, and under this ruling they will no longer face the threat of prosecution.”

So much for that.

Prosecutors declined to comment on the ruling. In a hearing last month, a prosecutor called Mr. Heicklen’s advocacy “a significant and important threat to our judicial system.”

Since I gave up on the political process, I think I'll turn my attentions to jury nullification activism, which has to be one of the most worthwhile activities. But first, I'm gonna save up some money for a lawyer.