You Are (Probably) a Federal Criminal

[Iason Ouabache]

Kafka was right!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/21/heritage-house-law/

With all the attention that's been paid lately to long federal sentences for drug offenders, it's surprising that a far more troubling phenomenon has barely hit the media's radar screen. Every year, thousands of upstanding, responsible Americans run afoul of some incomprehensible federal law or regulation and end up serving time in federal prison.

What is especially disturbing is that it could happen to anyone at all -- and it has.

We should applaud Reps. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) and Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), then, for holding a bipartisan hearing today to examine how federal law can make a criminal out of anyone, for even the most mundane conduct.

Federal law in particular now criminalizes entire categories of activities that the average person would never dream would land him in prison. This is an inevitable result of the fact that the criminal law is no longer restricted to punishing inherently wrongful conduct -- such as murder, rape, robbery, and the like.

Moreover, under these new laws, the government can often secure a conviction without having to prove that the person accused even intended to commit a bad act, historically a protection against wrongful conviction.

Laws like this are dangerous in the hands of social engineers and ambitious lawmakers -- not to mention overzealous prosecutors -- bent on using government's greatest civilian power to punish any activity they dislike. So many thousands of criminal offenses are now in federal law that a prominent federal appeals court judge titled his recent essay on this overcriminalization problem, "You're (Probably) a Federal Criminal."

Consider small-time inventor and entrepreneur Krister Evertson, who will testify at today's hearing. Krister never had so much as a traffic ticket before he was run off the road near his mother's home in Wasilla, Alaska, by SWAT-armored federal agents in large black SUVs training automatic weapons on him.

Evertson, who had been working on clean-energy fuel cells since he was in high school, had no idea what he'd done wrong. It turned out that when he legally sold some sodium (part of his fuel-cell materials) to raise cash, he forgot to put a federally mandated safety sticker on the UPS package he sent to the lawful purchaser.

Krister's lack of a criminal record did nothing to prevent federal agents from ransacking his mother's home in their search for evidence on this oh-so-dangerous criminal.

The good news is that a federal jury in Alaska acquitted Krister of all charges. The jurors saw through the charges and realized that Krister had done nothing wrong.

The bad news, however, is that the feds apparently had it in for Krister. Federal criminal law is so broad that it gave prosecutors a convenient vehicle to use to get their man.

Two years after arresting him, the feds brought an entirely new criminal prosecution against Krister on entirely new grounds. They used the fact that before Krister moved back to Wasilla to care for his 80-year-old mother, he had safely and securely stored all of his fuel-cell materials in Salmon, Idaho.

According to the government, when Krister was in jail in Alaska due to the first unjust charges, he had "abandoned" his fuel-cell materials in Idaho. Unfortunately for Krister, federal lawmakers had included in the Resource Recovery and Conservation Act a provision making it a crime to abandon "hazardous waste." According to the trial judge, the law didn't require prosecutors to prove that Krister had intended to abandon the materials (he hadn't) or that they were waste at all -- in reality, they were quite valuable and properly stored away for future use.

With such a broad law, the second jury didn't have much of a choice, and it convicted him. He spent almost two years locked up with real criminals in a federal prison. After he testifies today, he will have to return to his halfway house in Idaho and serve another week before he is released.

(Via @dangerousmeme)

[Requia ☣]

I've been ranting about this for years, ever since I found out playing poker in the dorms qualified me for a felony.
I do love that this guy was essentially forced to commit a crime by the government though.

Didn't Roger prove Kafka right based on traffic laws his last day as a cop?

Whats with Fox's constant reporting on Wasilla, are we that obsessed with the place now thanks to Palin?

[fomenter]

see the movie "aka Tommy Chong" he went to federal prison for 9 months for being entrapped into selling glass across a state line,

and forget fighting a fed case, the way it seems to work they threaten you with huge sentence to get a plea bargain, and nobody will ever risk the sentence to fight one of these cases, Tommy had to take a plea deal or they would have gone after his whole family..

[Kai]

You know what the conclusion of the hearing is going to be?

Something like, "Yes, it's wrong, it happens all the time, and we're not going to do anything about it".

[Bruno]

This is what happens when Congress passes so much legislation that they don't even have the time to, you know, actually read the bills they're voting on.

[Bu🤠ns]

<AHEM> Fuel Cells 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I've been hollering about this for years, on this very forum.

But I suppose it takes a media source for anyone to actually pay attention.

[MMIX]

Kafka was right!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2009/07/21/heritage-house-law/

The good news is that a federal jury in Alaska acquitted Krister of all charges. The jurors saw through the charges and realized that Krister had done nothing wrong.

According to the trial judge, the law didn't require prosecutors to prove that Krister had intended to abandon the materials (he hadn't) or that they were waste at all -- in reality, they were quite valuable and properly stored away for future use.

With such a broad law, the second jury didn't have much of a choice, and it convicted him. He spent almost two years locked up with real criminals in a federal prison.

(Via @dangerousmeme)

Isn't the whole point of jury trials that the jury get to decide what the outcome is?  WTF is the point of having them there if they are just going to rubber stamp bad laws with worse justice???

[Elder Iptuous]

I've been hollering about this for years, on this very forum.

But I suppose it takes a media source for anyone to actually pay attention.

I've been here for only a year, and i can attest that we all hear you....

i hereby officially acknowledge you individually, and with great foresight, made this observation, as well.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I've been hollering about this for years, on this very forum.

But I suppose it takes a media source for anyone to actually pay attention.

I've been here for only a year, and i can attest that we all hear you....

i hereby officially acknowledge you individually, and with great foresight, made this observation, as well.

Jesus.  Not the fucking point.  Nevermind.

But it's nice to know you have such a high opinion of me.

Asswipe.

[Iason Ouabache]

Isn't the whole point of jury trials that the jury get to decide what the outcome is?  WTF is the point of having them there if they are just going to rubber stamp bad laws with worse justice???

This is exactly why all civics classes need to stress jury nullification. Fuck it, let's push that meme ourselves since our public schools are doing such a bad job at it.

[fomenter]

Isn't the whole point of jury trials that the jury get to decide what the outcome is?  WTF is the point of having them there if they are just going to rubber stamp bad laws with worse justice???

This is exactly why all civics classes need to stress jury nullification. Fuck it, let's push that meme ourselves since our public schools are doing such a bad job at it.

the last time i had jury duty i got talking with a disgruntled lawyer, and when i commented on the selection process taking so long because they had to explain basic civics, he said that was the new norm, and that they don't really have civics any more! now even the fundamental concept of innocent until proven guilty has to be explained every time a jury is empaneled..

good luck explaining jury nullification..

[the last yatto]

dont judges throw you in jail for concept of court, or remove you from the jury, for raising  the issue of jury nullification

[Requia ☣]

Mentioning Jury nullification is the easiest way to avoid jury duty.

[Golden Applesauce]

I know I'm a federal criminal.  Remember that "Free Speech Zone" poster I posted a while back?  Apparently, putting an official government seal on an official looking flier is against the law.  Luckily for me they decided not to prosecute.