Local Patriot Needs Our Help

[Charlie Parker]

September 29th, Tuesday, is Turtle's new trial. I know, you may be thinking, "I don't even know this guy, so why should I go to his trial?" Because what is really on trial is your rights against unwarranted search and seizure.

Turtle's only crime was running out of gas and failure to be properly subservient to the Denver Police by standing up for his rights. As a result they confiscated his van and sold it at auction (and pocketed the money!).

If the judge rules in favor of the police in this case, then this sends a clear message to the police that they can pretty much do whatever they want, regardless of citizen's rights. We cannot let this happen. Please keep reading and then support Turtle by being present at his trial this Tuesday.

Charlie Parker


A MESSAGE FROM ROB FROM THE "WE ARE CHANGE COLORADO" (WACC) GROUP:

OK folks,

One more time!

Because the police officer was "on vacation", Turtle's last court date was continued, instead of being thrown out like it should have been. Turtle's sick of the whole thing, and hates to ask for your support again, but he knows he needs it. If anyone has any questions about his charges, or wants to know more about how they stole his property without due process, please feel free to call him up at 720-841-1257.

It would mean a lot to Turtle if you could make it and support him. He's one of our most dynamic, dedicated, and powerful activists, and it would be a tragedy to lose him to the criminal court system. See email below for more info.

Read his plea below and come out and support him if you can possibly make it.

Where and when:

Denver public court house, downtown, September 29th, court room 316R at 12pm.

In Truth, Love, and Freeedom,
Rob at WeAreChangeColorado


SOME NOTES FROM TURTLE:

This is my humble request for anyone and everyone to please come out and support me. It will be a jury trial. Gary Feilder the resident WAC lawyer will be trying the case. It should be entertaining at the least. We plan on showing some video footage from the Richard Gage event last year as evidence. This will also give us an opportunity to inject 9/11 into the court room which should definitely make for an interesting trial.

I will thank those of you in advance that pledged to be there it means more to me than I could put into words to be have people in my life that support me. I only hope I can do the same for any of you if ever needed.

This trial is a huge deal. I already lost my car to the city of Denver without due process. Now they will be trying to take my freedom, my money, might right to travel and the means for me to put food on my family's table. That thought of it makes me sick. I cannot allow this to happen to me and so that is why I ask you all to please call in sick, take a day off and please come out to support me, but more important to stand up against the criminals who run our courts and victimize poor citizens who do not have the means to represent themselves. Being charged with any crime in today's system is like being thrown to the bottom of a pit and being told "good luck getting out buddy, if you can get yourself out you can go free."

They impounded my family car, then auctioned it (without being able to get any property out of it either...... they do this to people with their houses too!) and never gave me a chance to litigate it. They do this under the "Nuisance abatement act" where any of your property, cars, trailers, motor homes, boats, firearms, even your home can be taken in a civil injunction if it falls under code allowing it to be deemed as a "public nuisance" I did a lot of reading on this law that allows the city of Denver to rob people of their personal property and it seems Denver takes citizens property using this every day.
Auctioning it off and doing who knows what with all that revenue. People lose their houses for minor misdemeanor violations of law that in a lot of cases are civil matters not even criminal offenses. They will take your house or your car, even if the bank owns it and it is not paid off they don't care!

After this is over I plan on organizing with some other groups I have talked with around town who are trying to stand up against this nuisance abatement law and have lost property unjustly to the city.

Anyway please do all you can to come I would love to fill that judges court room with citizens turned out to support another and show them WE are ":The People" not the prosecutors and the judges!!! If you have any questions, need a ride, or anything you can call me at 720.841.1257 I work a lot so if you don't get me leave a message I will call you back.

Thank you all,
Turtle-WACC

[Robert Meldahl]

I have always had good experiences with the police. I realize their fallibility and the tough job that they have to do. Knowing that, I use courtesy and patience whenever I am interacting with them. The whole idea of libertarianism is based upon the people having a limited set of laws that protect them and their liberties and a police force with the ability to enforce those laws.

What Turtle calls "proper subservience," I would probably call respectful cooperation, the basis behind a free market society. I personally have better things to do with my time then help make a civil rights case out of someone making an ass of himself.

[Jeanne Hines]

Robert, Standing up for rights that are, according to the Consititution bestowed by the Creator, (NOT the government or a police officer when he is in a good mood) does not necessarily equate to having an attitude. Refusing to agree to a search is a right. Even if I have nothing to hide they have NO BUSINESS searching my car. Everyone should acquaint themselves with the proper way to "not agree to a search".

Your comment strikes me as a knee jerk reaction. Do you know Turtle? I have met him a couple of times and acting like an "ass" isn't my impression of him. Before you make assumptions you might stop and think long and hard about the day YOU might need some support. More and more everyday Police get away with behavior towards people that is unacceptable. The force used is escalating against all reason for non-violent "crimes" everyday. People get tasered and shot for not having a proper "attitude". Hope you never need anyones's support. These folks would have appreciated some:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eIlr0UGcI0

http://www.click2houston.com/video/20950804/index.html
http://www.ketv.com/news/20955462/detail.html
http://www.wlwt.com/health/20703731/detail.html
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/MI_cops_shoot_unarmed_20yearold_marij...
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/nation/story/75729.html
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1782491,nurse-lawsuit-cop-cuff-d...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09246/995190-53.stm

By the by...I am a 53 year old mother who is teaching her teen age daugters the correct way to respond if and when they have an encounter with "law enforcement".

Robert Meldahl said:

I have always had good experiences with the police. I realize their fallibility and the tough job that they have to do. Knowing that, I use courtesy and patience whenever I am interacting with them. The whole idea of libertarianism is based upon the people having a limited set of laws that protect them and their liberties and a police force with the ability to enforce those laws.

What Turtle calls "proper subservience," I would probably call respectful cooperation, the basis behind a free market society. I personally have better things to do with my time then help make a civil rights case out of someone making an ass of himself.

[Robert Meldahl]

I appreciate your response. With some technical exceptions ("plain sight," etc) the police need a warrant to make a search without your consent. If Turtle's only sin was to say "No," he is entitled to our support.

If fact, my comment is based upon a first impression, or what you would refer to as a "knee jerk reaction."

Still, my experience with police has always been benign. I, in turn, have always been cooperative and we have always parted on friendly terms. I would teach my children, if I had any, that many police officers are professionals and many of the people that are afraid of them have problems with any symbol of authority.

I got mugged once in Boston. When the mugger got caught by the police with my cooperation, he immediately used the race card, first on me, and then on the policeman who sided with me only after giving him every possible "benefit of the doubt." Claims of police brutality came when his guilt became obvious.

Let me correct my "knee-jerk" reaction: before I wasted my time, the people asking for my help would have to give me more reason than that old canard of "proper subservience." Without a better reason, I must assume that Turtle "copped an attitude."

Jeanne Hines said:

Robert, Standing up for rights that are, according to the Consititution bestowed by the Creator, (NOT the government or a police officer when he is in a good mood) does not necessarily equate to having an attitude. Refusing to agree to a search is a right. Even if I have nothing to hide they have NO BUSINESS searching my car. Everyone should acquaint themselves with the proper way to "not agree to a search".

Your comment strikes me as a knee jerk reaction. Do you know Turtle? I have met him a couple of times and acting like an "ass" isn't my impression of him. Before you make assumptions you might stop and think long and hard about the day YOU might need some support. More and more everyday Police get away with behavior towards people that is unacceptable. The force used is escalating against all reason for non-violent "crimes" everyday. People get tasered and shot for not having a proper "attitude". Hope you never need anyones's support. These folks would have appreciated some:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9eIlr0UGcI0

http://www.click2houston.com/video/20950804/index.html
http://www.ketv.com/news/20955462/detail.html
http://www.wlwt.com/health/20703731/detail.html
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/MI_cops_shoot_unarmed_20yearold_marij...
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/nation/story/75729.html
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1782491,nurse-lawsuit-cop-cuff-d...
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09246/995190-53.stm

By the by...I am a 53 year old mother who is teaching her teen age daugters the correct way to respond if and when they have an encounter with "law enforcement".

Robert Meldahl said:

I have always had good experiences with the police. I realize their fallibility and the tough job that they have to do. Knowing that, I use courtesy and patience whenever I am interacting with them. The whole idea of libertarianism is based upon the people having a limited set of laws that protect them and their liberties and a police force with the ability to enforce those laws.

What Turtle calls "proper subservience," I would probably call respectful cooperation, the basis behind a free market society. I personally have better things to do with my time then help make a civil rights case out of someone making an ass of himself.

[Charlie Parker]

Turtle left his phone number so you can call him and ask him for yourself exactly what took place. At any rate, confication of his van (with no hope of getting it back or getting paid for it) seems excessive given what I know.

Charlie Parker

[Robert Meldahl]

Thanks Charlie. Keep in mind that my comments are a reflection of skepticism; not criticism.

Confiscating a van might be excessive, but if contraband was found legally, it would be evidence and its confiscation would be very proper. Again, we are being asked for our support without knowing the facts.

Have turtle email me his phone number ([e-mail]). If his case is a sympathetic one, I would be glad to add a post giving specific details of why he deserves the support of liberty lovers.

I have a law degree from U. of Montana, 1974, so I know the importance of having the facts before advocating a cause.

I also know the damage that is caused by liberal cop-haters who advocate a cause without knowing the facts and just jump into action because the "pigs got it coming" (i.e. the Abu Jamal cop-murder from Philadelphia has a lot of celebrities supporting his release).

Charlie Parker said:

Turtle left his phone number so you can call him and ask him for yourself exactly what took place. At any rate, confication of his van (with no hope of getting it back or getting paid for it) seems excessive given what I know.

Charlie Parker

[Charlie Parker]

Turtle's phone number is in the original post. Here it is again: 720-841-1257.

By the way, the part about not being "subservient" is MY comment, not his.

Charlie

[Charlie Parker]

UPDATE!!

Turtle's trial was yesterday, September 29th. He was charged with the following:

1) DUI (Driving Under the Influence of alcohol).
2) Carrying a gun while intoxicated.
3) Careless Driving.
4) Failure to signal when changing lanes.
5) Running a red light.

The defense presented the arresting officer as a witness. This guy came across as not being too bright. Several times in his testimony, he said things that contradicted earlier statements. For example, at the trial he said that Turtle was "rude and uncooperative". However, in the hearing last February he stated that Turtle was "polite and did what was asked of him". The officer stated that Turtle's speech was "slurred". Yet, Turtle had just come back from a Richard Gage event (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth), where is did several interviews on video. Portions of the video were presented in court showing that Turtle was not intoxicated in any way just prior to the arrest. And there were several other times where the officer was obviously not telling the truth. The credibility of the officer was pretty much destroyed by Turtle's defense.

On the gun charge, Turtle has a license to carry a concealed weapon. But even if you have a license, you cannot carry a weapon while intoxicated, so this charge depended on the first charge (DUI).

The careless driving charge stemmed from the other 2 traffic violations.

The red light violation was because his van ran out of gas in an intersection and his van was part way into the intersection when the light turned red. The incident occurred around 1:00 am on a week-day, after the Richard Gage event, so there was not much traffic at the time and Turtle's van did not cause any traffic problems.

The jury only deliberated about 20 minutes on all charges and returned a NOT GUILTY verdict on all charges except the failure to signal and the red light charge. Turtle was charged a traffic fine of $100 plus $44 court costs.

This is a MAJOR victory for freedom and it has somewhat restored my faith in the judicial system.

Charlie

[Robert Meldahl]

My congratulations to Turtle. I am glad that his acquittals were based on a test of the facts before a jury rather than a demonstration of "defying the authorities' demand for proper subservience."

By the way, how does a recording of a sober Turtle prove that he was not drunk later when the policeman arrested him? It has been many years since I was last intoxicated but I do remember from my college days that, before becoming intoxicated, I started out sober.

Charlie Parker said:

UPDATE!!

Turtle's trial was yesterday, September 29th. He was charged with the following:

1) DUI (Driving Under the Influence of alcohol).
2) Carrying a gun while intoxicated.
3) Careless Driving.
4) Failure to signal when changing lanes.
5) Running a red light.

The defense presented the arresting officer as a witness. This guy came across as not being too bright. Several times in his testimony, he said things that contradicted earlier statements. For example, at the trial he said that Turtle was "rude and uncooperative". However, in the hearing last February he stated that Turtle was "polite and did what was asked of him". The officer stated that Turtle's speech was "slurred". Yet, Turtle had just come back from a Richard Gage event (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth), where is did several interviews on video. Portions of the video were presented in court showing that Turtle was not intoxicated in any way just prior to the arrest. And there were several other times where the officer was obviously not telling the truth. The credibility of the officer was pretty much destroyed by Turtle's defense.

On the gun charge, Turtle has a license to carry a concealed weapon. But even if you have a license, you cannot carry a weapon while intoxicated, so this charge depended on the first charge (DUI).

The careless driving charge stemmed from the other 2 traffic violations.

The red light violation was because his van ran out of gas in an intersection and his van was part way into the intersection when the light turned red. The incident occurred around 1:00 am on a week-day, after the Richard Gage event, so there was not much traffic at the time and Turtle's van did not cause any traffic problems.

The jury only deliberated about 20 minutes on all charges and returned a NOT GUILTY verdict on all charges except the failure to signal and the red light charge. Turtle was charged a traffic fine of $100 plus $44 court costs.

This is a MAJOR victory for freedom and it has somewhat restored my faith in the judicial system.

Charlie

[Charlie Parker]

The video was shot throughout the night (at the Richard Gage event), up to about midnight, at which point Turtle drove 2 people home and proceeded home himself. He was stopped around 1:00 am so he would have had to be drinking in the vehicle in order to have time to get drunk and the police found no alcohol in the vehicle. Besides, the officer testified that Turtle found and gave him all the requested papers (driver's license, registration and proof of insurance) without any problems, that he (Turtle) seemed to be alert and understood everything the officer said and that Turtle did not have any problems getting out of the van or walking to the police car. The officer's only reason to suspect drunken driving was that he (the officer) gave Turtle some sort of test where he holds up a pen light and moves it side to side to see how well your eyes track it. According to the officer, Turtle failed this test. However, it has been proven medically that a person who has had a head injury (at any time prior to the test) may also fail this test. Turtle has had 7 concussions, one very serious one. Thus, the only "proof" that the officer had was the pen light test and his statement about Turtle's speech being "slurred". Defense was able to show that the pen light test meant nothing (because of the head injuries) and that Turtle did not have "slurred" speech at the time the last portion of the video was taken (about an hour before the arrest).

Charlie

[Robert Meldahl]

Back when I practiced law in Montana, I actually had DUI charged client who had suffered nerve damage as a child from, I believe, rheumatic fever. He had a naturally slurred speech and he shuffled his feet.

Although my client was innocent, both he and I understood how the police could have made a misjudgment from his behavior. We were both very respectful in our negotiations and, together with the officer, had the prosecuting attorney drop all charges.

I continue to believe that the majority of police officers, including perhaps the one that arrested Turtle, are very professional, although often capable of making a mistake in a very stressful job. Turtle's acquittal does not convince me that the police were abusive or oppressive.

Charlie Parker said:

The video was shot throughout the night (at the Richard Gage event), up to about midnight, at which point Turtle drove 2 people home and proceeded home himself. He was stopped around 1:00 am so he would have had to be drinking in the vehicle in order to have time to get drunk and the police found no alcohol in the vehicle. Besides, the officer testified that Turtle found and gave him all the requested papers (driver's license, registration and proof of insurance) without any problems, that he (Turtle) seemed to be alert and understood everything the officer said and that Turtle did not have any problems getting out of the van or walking to the police car. The officer's only reason to suspect drunken driving was that he (the officer) gave Turtle some sort of test where he holds up a pen light and moves it side to side to see how well your eyes track it. According to the officer, Turtle failed this test. However, it has been proven medically that a person who has had a head injury (at any time prior to the test) may also fail this test. Turtle has had 7 concussions, one very serious one. Thus, the only "proof" that the officer had was the pen light test and his statement about Turtle's speech being "slurred". Defense was able to show that the pen light test meant nothing (because of the head injuries) and that Turtle did not have "slurred" speech at the time the last portion of the video was taken (about an hour before the arrest).

Charlie