James Cleaveland Jury Deliberating – Union Leader Covers Trial

Yesterday the trial of Free Keene blogger James Cleaveland for recording police wrapped up with an excellent closing argument by defense attorney Paul Garrity (video still to come) advocating jury nullification. The jury was sent to deliberate and could not reach a verdict by the close of court. This morning, the jury was back to deliberating at 9am – the fact that it’s taking this long could be a good sign for James.

Activists were out front of the court this morning for the fourth day in a row holding signs and offering jury nullification information from NHJury.com. Yesterday, Union Leader reporter Meghan Pierce showed up to cover the trial. Here’s her report, published in today’s Union Leader.

Any developments in the case will be tweeted by Darryl W Perry here. Stay tuned for the latest – will the jury acquit our hero?

Here’s a pic from this morning’s outreach:

Jury Outreach Activists @ Cheshire Superior Court 2015-12-17

Jury Outreach Activists @ Cheshire Superior Court 2015-12-17

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!

1 Comment

  1. It appears that no person was victimized in this situation by the defendant. If anything, the person filming police from a distance (exercising a right of the press and another right to keep government accountable) seems to be the one being victimized here.

    My conscience would not allow me to put that person in jail or make him pay money for exercising a right. Blindly doing that, jailing people for noncrimes, is how the USA has ended up with the world’s highest prison population. Of course putting a peaceful person in jail wastes lots of tax money too. Ironic that any jurors voting to jail him, could also be paying for it. How do you “correct” somebody for exercising a right again?

    Thankfully jurors have the right of conscience, hopefully they’ll find the courage to exercise THAT right and not behave like automated drones of the state or Milgram experiment participants obeying orders.

    This thoughtful young man should not be jailed or fined. Not guilty is the obvious choice for any juror with a conscience..

Care to comment?