Jim Johnson (Tres Passive Twelve) Final Pretrial, 11am

[Jim Johnson]

I don't think they liked my defiant body posture.

So, you were "other than prostrated", then?

Or alternatively, "other than prostate examined"?

I was doing 'The American'... Like a Boss... hands on the hips, thumbs back. 

[littlehawk]

After many, many lost battles in the courts, I just won a pretty big case representing myself. My comments are not meant to be boastful. I am just sharing the things that I thought helped me win my case. My case had no witnesses in my defense and I was up against 3 cops as their witnesses. I won because I convinced the jury they did not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt AND I also got the jury to like me and believe me.

Explain clearly (to the jury) what "beyond a reasonabe doubt" is. Define it for them in legal terms and then define it for them in layman terms. AND THEN keep hammering it home. 

exactly what are you being charged with?

[Jim Johnson]

635.2  Criminal Trespass

[littlehawk]

OK, I kind of remember this case and your first kangaroo trial with Burke and no jury, correct? This must be the appeal trial I am assuming.

Since the last trial, have you asked for Discovery? and if anything is being excluded have you requested a explanation to why that specific information was not handed over to you? (you have probably already done this)

In your defense are you going to say you were never asked or told to leave their so-called property? If no one told you to leave, then use it. If one (or many) of the goons told you to leave (and other goons will testify to that) then do not touch it. Focus elsewhere (see below). But if you plan to put a heavier focus on the jailhouse being a non private location then whether you were asked to leave or not is irrelevant. It is not private property so they had no right in asking you to leave. Yes, in a sense they could have asked you to leave but you politely could have declined and end of story. They had no right to force you to leave OR taken it further and arrested you. So, if you just want to focus on the "this is not private property" stance then all this could be omitted. It doesn't matter what they told you.

Further into this: I assume you will try to acknowledge that the copshop/jail  is NOT private property. Correct? (you probably did that in the first trial.)  Have legal documents to support your positions. Enter them to the court as evidence and number them. Give one to the judge and prosecuter and then hand out copies to the jurors. Then read them word for word and make the jurors understand it. Establishing that the building was built by tax payers money and that the salaries for the workers are paid by tax dollars will easily show the building and its pinheads are not a private organization and that it is not private property. But you need the documentation to support your claims. Also, ask the prosecution for documentation that proves the copshop/jail is private property.  This will be advatageous when they cannot produce anything. Hammer on this..and ask for it several times throughout the trial to get the jurors attention. Use it in your Closing statements too.

What is it that you were doing (specifically) that made them want you to leave? Is this when you folks were marching around the parking lot? (I remember seeing a clip of that, if so). Where you blocking traffic, harassing people, etc? Does the prosecution have any witnesses (excluding the coppers) that disapproved of your assembly? If not bring this up for discussion. No witnesses makes it hard to prove "beyond a reasonable doubt). The coppers can not be included as they are considered in the realm of "conflict of interest.  Was they any proof of damages? (mental anguish, physical harm to others, destruction of property, traffic jams due to marching, etc)

Where you just peacefully assembling? (aka exercsing your rights). Inform the jury of the Bill of Rights. Most jurors do not have a clue. 

Present to the jury that there is not a "specific law" that states that assembling at that location is illegal. "Criminal Trespassing" is a wide open definition and lacks specificities. It is generic and vague and commonly abused by those in authority...much like "disordely conduct" and "harassment" and "resisting." Ask the prosecution to produce the law that specifies "assembling peacefully in the lot is illegal."

Keep the trial as short as possible. Jurors lose interest quick. After I won my last trail I asked for the transscripts and re- read them. I could have eliminated a lot of the info I presented and still won the case. Make it fun for you and the jurors but keep it fast moving, direct and get it over with.

Present the biggies and avoid the little stuff: ONE: Focus on that the grounds are NOT private property and TWO: you have a God given-right (and Constitutional right) to assemble. From there just HAMMER it home.

[littlehawk]

You may want to try this and see if you can sneak it by. Use the REAL definiton of trespass:

tres·pass (trsps, -ps)
intr.v. tres·passed, tres·pass·ing, tres·pass·es
1. To commit an offense or a sin; transgress or err.
2. Law To commit an unlawful injury to the person, property, or rights of another, with actual or implied force or violence, especially to enter onto another's land wrongfully.
3. To infringe on the privacy, time, or attention of another: "I must . . . not trespass too far on the patience of a good-natured critic" (Henry Fielding).
n. (trsps, -ps)
1. Transgression of a moral or social law, code, or duty.
2. Law
a. The act of trespassing.
b. A suit brought for trespassing.
3. An intrusion or infringement on another.
----------------------------------------------------------------

and use the REAL definiton oif criminal:

Definition of CRIMINAL

1: relating to, involving, or being a crime <criminal neglect>
2: relating to crime or to the prosecution of suspects in a crime <criminal statistics> <brought criminal action>
3: guilty of crime; also : of or befitting a criminal <a criminal mind>
4: disgraceful
— crim·i·nal·ly adverb

[littlehawk]

635.2  Criminal Trespass

635:2 Criminal Trespass. –
    I. A person is guilty of criminal trespass if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place.
    II. Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor for the first offense and a class B felony for any subsequent offense if the person knowingly or recklessly causes damage in excess of $1,500 to the value of the property of another.
    III. Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor if:
       (a) The trespass takes place in an occupied structure as defined in RSA 635:1, III; or
       (b) The person knowingly enters or remains:
          (1) In any secured premises;
          (2) In any place in defiance of an order to leave or not to enter which was personally communicated to him by the owner or other authorized person; or
          (3) In any place in defiance of any court order restraining him from entering such place so long as he has been properly notified of such order.
    IV. All other criminal trespass is a violation.
    V. In this section, "secured premises'' means any place which is posted in a manner prescribed by law or in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, or which is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders.
    VI. In this section, "property,'' "property of another,'' and "value'' shall be as defined in RSA 637:2, I, IV, and V, respectively

[littlehawk]

from above: "A person is guilty of criminal trespass if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he enters or remains in any place."

If you weren't ask to leave then you did not know. This would take to to the next realm: You could discuss the whole "priviledge" concept. IMO, dissecting THEIR RSA would bore the crap out of a jury. But if the trail forces you down that road be ready to go there.

[littlehawk]

from above: "II. Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor for the first offense and a class B felony for any subsequent offense if the person knowingly or recklessly causes damage in excess of $1,500 to the value of the property of another. "

We can toss this sucker out can't we?

[littlehawk]

from above: III. Criminal trespass is a misdemeanor if:
       (a) The trespass takes place in an occupied structure as defined in RSA 635:1, III; or

This applies to burglary so we can toss this out.


print copies of this and have ready if needed. RSA 635: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/635/635-1.htm
       

[littlehawk]

 from above: The person knowingly enters or remains:
          (1) In any secured premises;
          (2) In any place in defiance of an order to leave or not to enter which was personally communicated to him by the owner or other authorized person; or
          (3) In any place in defiance of any court order restraining him from entering such place so long as he has been properly notified of such order.


This is tricky, maybe others can help out. heres my jist of it.

1) the person enters or remains in any "secured premises."  They further state ""secured premises'' means any place which is posted in a manner prescribed by law or in a manner reasonably likely to come to the attention of intruders, or which is fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders.

Were there any signs posted on OUR property? If so does the prosecution have proof that there were signs at the time of the incident?(photos)  Are the signs even legitimate? (whose property is it?). This broad, non specific definiton seems to be more tailored for private property like someones home, garage, boat etc.  Fence? Enclosed? I don't think so.

I think we can toss this sucker out. If you have to go this route just continue to show that the prosecution cannot fullfill their "beyond a reasonable doubt" task. Just keep hammering on the RSA and show how it does not apply to you. But the important thing is to bang home that it is up to the prosecution to prove their case. They have to prove that you somehow fit into their bullshit RSA law.   

[littlehawk]

You probably know all this Jim and if so just ignore me. This might be of help to others reading it though...even for the pricks who lurk here (cops, judges, and other political piggies)

From the RSA: The person knowingly enters or remains:
                    (2) In any place in defiance of an order to leave or not to enter which was personally communicated to him by the owner or other authorized person;

If they did not "order" you to leave (verbally, in writing etc) then this does not apply. And if its not private property they are in no positon to make "orders."

Toss it.

[littlehawk]

(b) The person knowingly enters or remains:
                   (3) In any place in defiance of any court order restraining him from entering such place so long as he has been properly notified of such order.

I do not think you have any court restraining orders against you so we can toss this baby out too.

[littlehawk]

from the RSA "All other criminal trespass is a violation."

Ok, this is a joke. This is like the pearl of disclaimers. In case we can't think of anything, its "criminal trespass."
This is non specific, too generalized and is only put there to be abused. When all else fails they can try and make this fit.
You may want to have the prosecutor define "all other".  Let him/her explain and than ask her for further  proof and documentations to back her claims. She may not offer an explanation but either way let the jurors know how ridulous this is.
OTOH, this could be the right time to use Websters definiton of "criminal" and "trespass" because thats all this stupid sentence says.

BTW..almost always speak to jury. Fuck the others...yes be polite to the morons but your job is to win over the jury. Talk to them, look them in the eye, smile. Move it aorund, look at one person, then another etc.... it also keeps them attentive.
And Jim, do not wear goofy clothes. I know you like wearing robes and BurgerKing hats but please slap on a nice shirt, tie, blazer and clean jeans. Thats a nice layman, "average Joe" look that jurors can relate to.

[littlehawk]

and lastly: VI. In this section, "property,'' "property of another,'' and "value'' shall be as defined in RSA 637:2, I, IV, and V, respectively

in legalese: "DNFA"  Does Not F. k..in' Apply.

toss this out.

Remember, Win over the jury and Win the case. Use authentic charm (no phoney crap or "acting." Use intelligence and a soft spoken manner and convey your comments in simplistic layman terms. Give examples often to make things clear. Do not baffle them with bullshit just keep it simple. KISS. <wink>

**Your closing statement is HUGE. This is your momemt to summarize the trial in a quick and simple way for the jurors to understand. The jurors will be bored and tired at the end of this trail. They have been overwhelemed with "stuph" as Russell says. They only remember bits and pieces and they are going to be hungry as well. The last thing they want to do is deliberate for hours upon hours. It is up to you to give them what they want (and need) in order to come to the quick decision in your favor. tell them flat out: "ladies and gemtleman of the juroy, this is a no-brainer. We have wasted far too much tax dollars by even being here in this courtroom. I told you the factual truth and supported my claims with documentations, I showed you in detail how the prosecution did not prove me guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I showed you and proved to you how this building is not private property. It is PUBLIC property and therefore you and I have a right to assemble there peacefully according to our God -given rights and our constitutional rights. I broke down the definiton of the charge against me (criminal trespass)  and you have all seen how it does not apply to me in any shape way or form. I did nothing CRIMINAL nor did I TRESPASS, therefore you can only come to one conclusion and that is that I am not guilty on the charge placed against me.

[Jim Johnson]

littlehawk, Your posting all over the place, so I don't know where to respond.

If I wanted to be a quite dog and play their games I would not have gone to the jail protest that day.
If they would have told me I would be arrested if I did not leave, I would have backed off.
I do not believe in their religion of State, so I'm not going to learn their rules and be drawn into their religion.  They can twist the out come to their favor no matter what I do. 
I sometimes do lawyer things in court, it's a perversion I picked up from Perry Mason, I'm not under any delusion that it might help me win.

Thank you for all the advice, it seemed like good advise.
But, I am going to see if American tank drivers are more ruthless than Chinese tank drivers. 

I'm going to be standing in the middle of the road.