avatar
35 Years for Embarrassing the Guards?


150%;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"”>Boertji-Obed, In January president and CEO of Wackenhut (also called G4S Gov’t Solutions) Paul Donahue told the   font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"”>All three are out of jail on conditional release preparing for trial — set for May 7 — on three felony charges that together carry a maximum of 35 years on prison. Yes, 35 years for trespassing, spray painting and embarrassing.

font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"”>But as the News Sentinel reported Feb. 3, the bold intervenors know “ font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"”>The three were back in federal court Feb. 7 for a motion hearing before U.S. Magistrate Richard Shirley. They argued against the prosecuting U.S. attorney’s attempt to exclude any testimony about, get this, “nuclear weapons,” or “international law,” or the defendants’ intention to practice crime prevention at Y-12.

font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"”>The prosecutor’s motion “in limine,” or gag order, would, if granted, keep the jury from hearing a word about the outlaw status of the nuclear warheads. As with previous anti-nuclear cases, the defendants contend that binding U.S. treaties and military service manuals make nuclear weapons illegal because H-bombs can only produce uncontrollable, indiscriminate, toxic mass destruction using radioactive firestorms. Considering the sociopathic turpitude of preparing the use of such devices, all Sr. Rice, Boertji-Obed and Walli are guilty of, they contend, is an attempt at citizen’s arrest. Of course the government doesn’t want the jury to hear what the law says about planning and preparing massacres.

font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"”>For his part, Magistrate Shirley said he wouldn’t exactly limit the discussions of the defendants’ intentions. But Shirley only presides over pretrial hearings. The trial itself will be run by a federal judge who will rule on the motion “in limine,” choose the jury instructions, and decide on questions of “contempt” in the event that forbidden words are uttered by lawyers, defendants or observers.    

font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif"”>It’s a testament to the dominance of the H-bomb culture, that one of its judges can forbid defendants in a criminal case from explaining the basis for their actions, while wielding the power to impose 35 years in prison for nothing more than embarrassing that culture. PeaceVoice.

Leave a comment