Lets assume you’re the owner of a business and you employ five people. One day you find out that one of your employees is threatening people to make sales. You didn’t approve of this tactic and quickly move on this information. You call in the employee and address the situation. You explain to them that threatening people is not how you conduct business and even though it might produce larger sales in the short term, it will ultimately destroy the company – ending both your jobs. Hopefully the employee will understand and adapts (or atleast respects) to your request. Though it’s possible they wouldn’t (adapt) and you’d have to fire them. Either way, in business, when you don’t agree with your employee (or with your employer) you have the option to end the relationship (on either side).
Let’s go one step further and bring police into the scenario. Police are paid for with tax dollars and tax dollars are collected from taxpayers. Essentially, taxpayers are the employer’s of the police and, just like any other business, the employer has the right to tell the employee if (and/or when) they don’t approve of their employees actions. Right? Yet, there is NO real course of action one can take to stop police from doing something you don’t like or want, like regular employers can. You can’t physically stop the police officer, nor can you fire a police officer and you can’t stop paying taxes either – we all know what happens if you do. So, what can you do?
Video update of the days events. No trial footage.
The State had a jury trial for Ian Freeman. He was found not guilty of Resisting arrest and guilty of Obstructing. Jason Talley filmed the trial and gives a recap of the days events.
Ian Freeman has a hearing at the Cheshire Superior Court in regards to his supposed right to a speedy trial. Judge Arnold threatens activists with arrest for hat wearing.
The live streamed videos that were broadcast by Talley.TV from Greenfield, MA on July 18th and 19th have been organized into a YouTube playlist containing 25 videos. It begins on the 19th with Pete and Ademo announcing their victory in front of supporters and then switches to the morning on the 18th during the “No Victim No Crime” Rally in front of the Greenfield, MA Courthouse:
Thanks to Pete Eyre, Ademo Freeman, Ian Freeman, Kathy Breidel and others for providing live updates for the hundreds of people watching the live stream.
In addition to streaming live video updates, I posted to the CopBlock Facebook and Twitter accounts to quickly update their active police accountability network. As you may be aware, Pete Eyre and Ademo Mueller were victorious at the end of the day because they had the truth on their side (as documented by rolling video cameras) and jurors who were willing to go against the State by declaring that the two liberty activists were, indeed, “NOT GUILTY.”
The next episode of Talley.TV will feature a juror who explained why he voted against the State and in favor of Ademo & Pete in this historic court case.
Learn more about their victory over the Greenfield, MA law enforcers, prosecutors, judge, and other employees of the State at CopBlock.org. Thanks to the Civil Disobedience Evolution Fund for sponsoring the Talley.TV live stream.
As an activist, I try to support as many other activists as possible. So when I heard about Bob Constantine trial in Grafton County I did all I could to attend (pulling an all nighter the night before the trial). I thought the day would be boring as most court proceedings are but that wasn’t the case this time.
Right away we were told about a double security check and a ban of cameras from the courtroom. It didn’t take long for the activists to start asking questions and pushing the limits of these tyrannical rules. As seen in the video below Ian Freeman, fellow blogger here, did his best to get electronics into the courtroom, yet, was threatened with arrest if he didn’t leave.
What do you think? Should cameras ever be banned from a public building? If I have to pay for it shouldn’t I be allowed to record the actions that take place in such a place? Should undercover officers be protected? Aren’t they public servants? Do real public servants need to hide their face? Is this the world you want your children growing up in?
