tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post5484349278533419660..comments2020-04-20T08:19:54.450-05:00Comments on The Devil's Exercise Yard: How I'm feeling...David Nicklehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08072702212586811185noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-38286383589589599372010-03-29T07:02:58.123-05:002010-03-29T07:02:58.123-05:00And frankly, I wonder if it is not as much about t...And frankly, I wonder if it is not as much about the kind of folks who become border guards -- if they become border guards for the same reasons that folks become prison guards here, well, that's part of the problem. But of course, my first impulse is to refer folks to: American Methods: Torture and the Logic of Domination http://www.southendpress.org/2005/items/87530Val Grimmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00595437097252065530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-3911513269136509622010-03-25T05:40:21.373-05:002010-03-25T05:40:21.373-05:00There's a reason that juries deliberate behind...There's a reason that juries deliberate behind closed doors. Any jury can nullify a bad law ** simply by refusing to convict. ** No judge will include this in their instructions--in fact they will say the opposite, but it is true. A juror who says that their conscience made them convict someone because a good person found themselves in the cross-hairs of a bad law is confused about the meaning of conscience.<br /><br />Shame on that jury for not taking a stand against the abuse of police powers.HappyPetehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14808368003663557353noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-16095987030739897232010-03-23T07:26:28.271-05:002010-03-23T07:26:28.271-05:00gwenix: Actually, as I understand it Doug Mullkoff...gwenix: Actually, as I understand it Doug Mullkoff was a very good lawyer. He took apart the assault allegations; took apart the prosecution witnesses; emphasized the truth about the nature of Peter's hesitation. The jury did what it did in the face of that - it strictly interpreted a law so broad as to be meaningless.<br /><br />Because, if the dissenting jurors are to be credited, its members believed they had been ordered to do so - and believed that their duty was to follow that order.David Nicklehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08072702212586811185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-67342761238746482702010-03-23T07:19:49.330-05:002010-03-23T07:19:49.330-05:00Sadly, it sounds like the defense lawyer wasn'...Sadly, it sounds like the defense lawyer wasn't very good if he allowed the jury to think that a law was broken. Failure to answer "in time" is not the same as "non-compliance", and it is not breaking any laws. Why was the lawyer not pressing that point? Had he given them just an inch on that, it sounds like they'd have acquitted happily.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02440327601940245552noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-45547956652002856112010-03-22T18:55:36.059-05:002010-03-22T18:55:36.059-05:00I also have to agree with Anonymous (3/20 11:03pm)...I also have to agree with Anonymous (3/20 11:03pm) about the arrogant behavior of US customs agents far pre-dating 9/11. I'm a native US citizen and in the early 80s, I worked for a Canadian company. My work took me to Canada frequently--Toronto and Calgary mostly. Canadian customs officers were always extremely professional and businesslike. US customs, on the other hand, were often surly and sadistic, no matter that I was re-entering my own country. On at least one of three trips, I missed my flight connection because a US customs agent (my nickname for them became 'Officer Cerberus') found some reason to delay my routine clearance--it was a smug little game with them. Officer Cerberus would look at my ticket or itinerary to see the departure time, tell me to "sit down over there" and let the clock run until my flight was gone, then bring me back and hand me my papers with no comment. <br /><br />I was (then) a young engineer in a coat and tie, and these guys, for one short moment, had near absolute power over me. Pretty sad and pathetic. People with these sociopathic tendencies are drawn to jobs that give them carte blanche power over others the way the federal statutes apparently do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-39942995310500706142010-03-21T17:35:09.509-05:002010-03-21T17:35:09.509-05:00@David Nickle; I stand corrected. My original post...@David Nickle; I stand corrected. My original post (dated March 2oth) was more of a critique of our border and customs officers, not the jury in question. I should have made that distinction.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-30102763286228534052010-03-21T12:08:48.622-05:002010-03-21T12:08:48.622-05:00As far as I know it is not against the law to vote...As far as I know it is not against the law to vote however you want on a jury. If the two jurors felt that Watts broke the law, but that the border guards were sarcastic and unreasonable and that the law was unfairly applied, they should have voted against convicting him. That's why we have a jury of our peers with judgment instead of a machine who tabulates the results against the laws and convicts.<br /><br />It's too bad the jury didn't use their common sense, but were also slaves to the instructions given by the judge regardless of what whether justice was done or not. <br /><br />And I don't care that it is Peter Watts, every time law enforcement even appear to be heavy handed and then these types of intimidating charges are pressed I think you should give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant, because the balance of power is so skewed. Perhaps someday when we hear less stories about abuse of power my opinions will reasonable swing back to a more balanced view. Not today.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18117573567556136072noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-82814875026050349102010-03-21T10:28:05.280-05:002010-03-21T10:28:05.280-05:00As a Federal criminal defense lawyer I am not surp...As a Federal criminal defense lawyer I am not surprised at the outcome. Most Federal criminal statutes are draconian, and nearly all customs and border guards are the dregs of law enforcement. They are people you wouldn't want living next to you or dating your son or daughter. They are government terrorists who are incapable of comprehending the concept of freedom!DenverChuckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01954904281248844533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-18952290404598557532010-03-21T09:05:24.468-05:002010-03-21T09:05:24.468-05:00Anonymous, Duke, Eric... I agree with you - I'...Anonymous, Duke, Eric... I agree with you - I've worried about border guards at the U.S. long before September, 2001. Although weirdly, I never had a very bad time with them personally. <br /><br />But I suspect Peter's case would have played differently if he'd defended a decade ago; I'm given to understand that it was only eight or nine years ago that Michigan broadened its definition of resisting and obstructing to include simple non-compliance or slow compliance. <br /><br />The jury, in other words, would have not felt such pressure to deliver a conviction. <br /><br />I don't have the new statute and the old statute in front of me, so I could be wrong about that. I could also be wrong about the fact that post-9/11 fears made it easier to pass such chilling legislation.<br /><br />I suspect that you are right, though, that the behaviour of the border guards in the first place might not have been so very different.David Nicklehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08072702212586811185noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-48581771291761914032010-03-21T08:50:42.387-05:002010-03-21T08:50:42.387-05:00As one of your neighbors to the south, I can attes...As one of your neighbors to the south, I can attest, through personal interactions, this is not the result of post 9/11 fear and paralysis. No dear friend, this is a result of adolescent bullies growing up and obtaining positions of authority as Customs officials. <br /><br />During my service as a U.S. Marine, the only force I ever feared were customs and border officials upon returning to the US. <br /><br />I would rather face an armed terrorist or foreign military power trying to end my life than our customs officials hiding their abusive tactics behind "federal officer" status.Eric Halbritterhttp://irreverent-ego.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-11366827886420409302010-03-21T08:00:08.494-05:002010-03-21T08:00:08.494-05:00I hear you, Anonymous. Blaming the post-9/11 zeal...I hear you, Anonymous. Blaming the post-9/11 zeal for security at the expense of all else is short-sighted - especially when you consider that the US government (at the federal level at least) has been on an uninterrupted downward trajectory into fascism since Eisenhower retired. Really, the Bush administration simply found a way to do in 8 years what might have taken 20 otherwise.S.Duke Ellishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10655632506689768684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-12132565830588573452010-03-21T05:24:44.139-05:002010-03-21T05:24:44.139-05:00What ever happened to Jury Nullification? This is...What ever happened to Jury Nullification? This is an excellent example. Oh, wait, the judge will throw you in jail if you mention it. Can't let the jury know all its rights, that messes up the system.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-30382962043670902252010-03-20T23:03:11.747-05:002010-03-20T23:03:11.747-05:00I'm not at all convinced that this has much to...I'm not at all convinced that this has much to do with the chilling effects of 9/11. I once had a disturbing encounter with a U.S. Border control officer while crossing the border from Vancouver (I'm American). This was in 1998. Although I wasn't assaulted, I could easily imagine how it cold have quickly escalated into an assault by these glorified mall cops (no offense to decent, hard-working mall cops). I was polite and forthcoming to the officer in question, yet he acted like a belligerent adolescent. (While looking at my Driver's License he told me that the fact that I was a California resident was one strike against me, two more and I was going to jail). This ordeal lasted over an hour, while he had his cohorts tear my car apart. When he couldn't find any more strikes to use against me, he literally threw my id at me as I was sitting in a chair inside their building. I think that categorizing recent encounters with these types as post 9/11 overzealousness gives them a modicum of respect. As if they were the results of good intentions gone bad. I don't believe this to be the case. I can't help but feel that they're just bullies that need to harass innocent people in order to feel like real men. Men like Peter Watts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-46477849596472812472010-03-20T19:55:12.980-05:002010-03-20T19:55:12.980-05:00a dull gray weight presses down
silence=deatha dull gray weight presses down<br /><br />silence=deathJohn Stephen Lewishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10029277050176226912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-866265970015944265.post-26909350525788491952010-03-20T18:25:03.697-05:002010-03-20T18:25:03.697-05:00As an American (USian?), I find myself very disapp...As an American (USian?), I find myself very disappointed at the authoritarian state we have tended towards since 9/11. This case is in a way emblematic of this tendency. Had I been a member of this jury, I don't think I would have had too difficult a time arguing that in the aftermath of his malicious treatment by the border guard, Dr. Watts acted reasonably and thus did nothing wrong. This would be less of an affront to justice than the verdict that was returned.moiocihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06201257315694416386noreply@blogger.com