Freedom of Speech Does Not Permit You To Break The Law

Ian Barry is a Seventeen year old who knowingly broke the law to make a point. Ian gave a speech as to why Marijuana ought to be legal to a High School class. During the speech, he lit a joint and by the end of the speech, ingested the joint. Police arrested him. He has been charged locally. He says in this article that he accepts responsibility for his actions and that he is ready to pay a penalty for his actions.

Ian points out that he had to break the law to bring any real attention to his cause. There he may be right. Many are calling his act a act of civil disobedience and claim that it ought to be protected from prosecution as freedom of speech. I think the kid understands free speech better than many lawyers do.

His act was not an act of free speech though it was an act of civil disobedience. He broke the law to prove a point; that the law is wrong. He may get attention to his cause, he may even earn jury nullification, which would go far in getting his point even more attention, but he is not protected from arrest prosecution and conviction for his act.

It is oft said that one's rights come to an end at the tip of another's nose. In other words, you are free to do what you like until you interfere with someone else's right to do the same. In Ian's case, he is not free to break the law, only to criticize it. He moved on from that when he carried the joint to/or in school. Given the SCOTUS recent decision in the "Bong hits for Jesus" case, Ian is headed for a criminal record assuming he doesn't go to trial and convince a jury to nullify the law. He is also garnering a lot of attention for his cause.

I am not sure this is a call I'd like a teenager to make. He has no idea, despite his bravado, of the trouble he has caused himself in the future. He has however made the decision and will have to live with the consequences until the law catches up with the rest of the society's view of marijuana.

Facebook and DWI: A Defense Attorney's Nightmare.

Chicago IL. Criminal Defense Attorney Steve Komie is doing a bang up job in the case of an 18 year old who was allegedly drunk and killed a motorcyclist. Unfortunately the woman, now 20 can't get out of her own way long enough to help him out.

Komie has proved that Town of South Elgin Police destroyed the blood test prosecutors hoped would prove Erika Scoliere was drunk when she collided with motorcyclist Frank Ferraro. Without the test and sample, the defense cannot test the blood nor can it test the accuracy of the test at trial. That any evidence in an on going case is destroyed is a mystery, that the "best evidence" against a murder suspect is destroyed, right before trial, should lead potential jurors to wonder if the test actually showed ANY proof of alcohol at all.

The lead story in the news Friday should have been about how police malfeasance is causing Scoliere to get less than a fair trial. BUT NO!!

Seems that Scoliere or one of her inane "friends" posted asinine pictures of her on Facebook guzzling Tequila at a college party(in violation of her terms of release.)

Now first off, how did this young woman GET INTO a college to begin with? I mean what kind of brain damage do you have to have to realize that you killed someone and people are not happy with you? Prosecutors are looking for a reason, ANY REASON to convict you, and you decide it is a good idea to be in a place known for alcohol and stupid decisions (sorry Frat parties are Frat parties)?

Secondly, you are out on bail with an order to "call in" to probation while you are allowed to attend your "out of state" private college and go on vacations with your family. How do you "misunderstand" that Court Order?? ( I have to ask though why no one from probation notified Komie that his client was missing calls.)

The damage here is not that Scoliere now must wear a SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor.) It is that instead of being viewed as the victim of police, and a rush to judgment by an angry and hostile prosecution, she is seen as a ditzy, spoiled, bratty kid who needs to be taken down. She is the poster child for the over-indulged college student. She pushed the story of the lost evidence off of the headline and reinforced her image of being the "Paris Hilton" of Kane County. (Piece of unsolicited advice for Steve Komie, you may need to hire this client a PR consultant with a brain.)

We are now in the days of everyone, friends and foes, being able to record every waking moment of our lives. It is time to get smart. Ms. Scoliere's parents need to smarten up too. Get her into the house and keep her there until her trial takes place. How about considering placement into a rehab? It doesn't matter how unhappy she is. Drive her to Mr. Ferraro's cemetery plot every day, and remind her how unhappy his family must be. Have her leave a flower on the grave, a stone on his tombstone, and a prayer for his and her soul.

To my friend and colleague Steve Komie: Keep up the good work. You have a tough client there, but you represent all of us when you work to keep the government honest. Good Luck.

Hattip Avvo Legal News
Hey guys next time dig a little deeper, your article missed the "real story" the one about the Police destroying evidence!!

Judge to School District: "PISS OFF!!" & Let the Kids Play Chess!!

Sometimes I love writing the title of these pieces can you tell? :P

When has a school district "nanny stated" itself too far?? Well in California, it seems that when the Shasta Union High School District wanted to drug test kids on the CHESS TEAM, a court said, uh NO!!! (Emphasis added...)

The district wanted to know who was using drugs so that they could ban them from school trips and other activities. So if the kid was in the Band, played on the Chess Team or was raising a pig for the state fair, he had to pee in a cup first. The reasoning is that the school has to supervise these kids while they are on school trips and if they are in a club or in the band they are more likely to have to go on overnight trips and they might be harder to supervise if they use drugs or alcohol. Brilliant! So we will just keep them out of supervised activities so they can take part in unsupervised activities... (No wonder Johnny can't think. These people have no idea about teaching anything.)

Now I have had the pleasure of "chaperoning" a few Forensic overnight trips, and while they have the ability to get out of hand, they don't, because DEBATE CLUB KIDS CAN'T DO DRUGS AND STILL PERFORM WELL!!

I have a feeling the same goes for members of the CHESS CLUB! Not to mention, it is far harder to play classical flute music than to improvise a new riff while you are high. Nonetheless, these examples of student spirit were told "pee in the bottle or no Drama club."

Now the SCOTUS, which is filled by people so old they don't remember BEING in High School, ruled about a dozen years ago that you can force a kid to take a drug test if he is even attending your school. Justice Marlow the judge in the case at bar held that under the California State Constitution the right to privacy is protected. One can debate whether such a right is in the US Bill of Rights, but Californian's passed this right in 1972.

I think the court in this case is right. It is the good kid who must give up his or her right to privacy while the slacker who does nothing in school but shows up can come and go as he pleases. Moreover, it shouldn't be a rule that to participate you have to allow someone to watch you urinate in a cup. High school is hard enough without having to pass every adult test. I'd like to know what you think however.

I could not find a copy of the decision to post, so if you know of one, pass it to me ok?

Thanks, TLD.

Hattip: Raw Story

It's D-Day and That Lawyer Dude Returns... Again.

I may revive this blog more often than Pop Tart Britney Spears revives her career, but I am back. It has been a while. I know that most of you who stop by here come to see me rant on something or just to see if I am alive (thanks for those of you who stop by to see if I am alive). I am. I am also ready to take on a few people places and things.

Where to start?

Hmmm. Let's see it is June 6th, a foreign nut job is trying to rub out the free world, our troops are dying oversees, Our Democrat president is trying to bring us out of a depression by spending more and more money, and the NY Yankees are over .500 It must be the year.... 1944. That's right it is D-day. Imagine how history repeats itself?

To our Veterans of that war and that day, I salute you. I also thank you for a service well done.

To our Veterans of today, I salute you as well. I celebrate your return from war, I pray for those of you who are still there, and I thank you for agreeing to take on the task of keeping us free.

I also do not want to let today go by without remembering, Robert F. Kennedy who was killed by an assasins bullets on June 5th 1968 some 41 years ago. He was a man who whether I would agree with his politics, asked the question "Why can we not be better than we are?"
It is an important question to ask of ourselves everyday.

Tomorrow's post: The Case of the Chess Club Urinalysis and other stories about governments over-reaching.